Chris Thile covering 1952 VBL

[Jeff Mando]

Another great version:

Cool version. With the exception of the singer who looks like a young Michael Stipe, the other three look like they could be in a Kingston Trio tribute band. I also noted how much buzz the guitarist thinks is acceptable on his solo -- I realize he is really "digging in" -- but seems like a lot of buzz to me. (small criticism of a nice performance)

I did a quick search on youtube and see that 52 Vincent Black Lightning is now a bluegrass staple, I say bluegrass, whatever this modern type of bluegrass is called......the term newgrass is almost 50 years old at this point....so not sure what to call it, but like the old judge said, "I know it when I see it!"

[Paul Kotapish]

Del and the boys were definitely not my introduction to the song.

While I like both the Thiele and McCoury versions, the Richard Thompson original will alway be my standard. I've been listening to him do -- in concerts and on vinyl -- since he released it on Rumor and Sigh back in '91 or so.

[JonZ]

Maybe an australian would be less confusing:

Now that’s a solo version with drive.

The most meta version would have to be The Red Molly Band’s.
Lovely harmonies, too.

[JeffD]

I'm guessing without the Del version becoming so popular, I doubt if many here would have even been familiar with the Richard Thompson version, looking it up long after the fact......

Really? See I kind of thought most people at least had heard of him even if if not familiar with his songs. Did you notice it was Suzanne Vega and Louden Wainright III on the stage with Richard Thompson? I assume a lot of folks have heard about them.

LWIII especially relevant here because his Charlie Poole tribute CD collection included Chris Thile here and there.

[foldedpath]

Del and the boys were definitely not my introduction to the song.

While I like both the Thiele and McCoury versions, the Richard Thompson original will alway be my standard. I've been listening to him do -- in concerts and on vinyl -- since he released it on Rumor and Sigh back in '91 or so.

Yeah, what I think many people miss about this song is that it's a British folk song. It's been co-opted as Americana, but listen to the lyrics. The phrasing is British, the motor bike is a British machine, and "Down to Boxhill they'd ride." It's pure Richard Thompson at his folkie best.

Not to take away from all the other interpretations, and I think Chris Thile did a great job of putting heart and soul into his singing of the tune. But listen closely to Thompson's version, including his fingerpicking, and nothing will beat it for me. You can Bluegrass it up, but it's like trying to cover a Dylan song.

[Ivan Kelsall]

Hi Len - I know Richard Thompson very well - just not the VBL song. RT vanished from my 'musical radar' quite a while back along with many other British 'Folkies',
Ivan

[Anglocelt]

The banjo is a 998cc V-twin engine in the Del version, particularly when everything else cuts out around 3 minutes in. It's perfect, so long as you're OK with the Britishness being stripped away from the song entirely.

The only bit of Britishness McCourt changed was the place name. Everything else is still in there, including the potentially misunderstood bit about 'Indians having no soul' (Indians were a make of British motorbike).
I am a bit surprised that more Richard Thompson songs have not been adopted by bluegrass bands; he has written loads of great pacy songs.
Kevin

[Ivan Kelsall]

'' Indian '' was a brand of US made motor cycles :- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian...turing_Company
Geoff Stelling was the proud owner of an Indian 'Chief' motor cycle, & produced a Banjo comemorating that model - " No. 3727 – First ''Indian Chief'', presented to the Indian Motorcycle Company in 1991 ",
Ivan

[PJ Doland]

To be accurate, from 1955 to 1960 Indians were rebadged (British) Royal Enfield motorcycles.

Also worth noting that from time to time Thompson substitutes various makes in that particularly line. I assume he's pandering to us British motorbike enthusiasts, while simultaneously denigrating our ride of choice.

On Rumor and Sigh he sings:

"Now Nortons and Indians and Greeveses won't do / They don't have a soul like a Vincent '52."

On Acoustic Classics recording he sings:

"Triumphs and Nortons and Beezas [BSAs] won't do / They don't have a soul like a Vincent '52"

[pops1]

On Acoustic Classics recording he sings:

"Triumphs and Nortons and Beezas [BSAs] won't do / They don't have a soul like a Vincent '52"

He is talking about Greeves motorcycles not BSA. It was also a British motorcylce and he says Greevesas won't do. The '52 Vincent he is talking about is specifically the '52 Vincent Black Lightning, most think it was the best motorcycle ever produced.

My dad rode one of the real Indian motorcycles, his was a 1940. They were a great motorcycle and visually stunning. Harley's rival at the time.

When I first heard this song he was still with Linda, don't know how long ago that was, but a while ago.

[PJ Doland]

On the original Rumor and Sigh album recording it's Greeveses (plural of Greeves).

But, as I said, changes it on other recordings. Listen to the Acoustic Classics version at 3'55"

It's clearly "Beezas" there. Which is a nickname that even BSA used in their own 1960's advertising.



And that's actually the bike I ride.

[Martin Jonas]

He is talking about Greeves motorcycles not BSA. It was also a British motorcylce and he says Greevesas won't do. The '52 Vincent he is talking about is specifically the '52 Vincent Black Lightning, most think it was the best motorcycle ever produced.

My dad rode one of the real Indian motorcycles, his was a 1940. They were a great motorcycle and visually stunning. Harley's rival at the time.

When I first heard this song he was still with Linda, don't know how long ago that was, but a while ago.

Putting my RT geek hat on: the song was written around 1990 and appeared on Thompson's 1991 album "Rumor & Sigh". As he split up with Linda in 1982, your memory must play you a trick.

PJ is right in saying that RT has made many changes to the line-up of other (inferior) bikes over the years -- the original studio recording from 1991 differs from the recent re-recording on his "Acoustic Classics" solo studio album. So, you are right that is was Greeves on the original, and PJ is right that it's BSA on the re-recording.

Martin
[Edit: my post crossed with PJ's...]

[pops1]

Putting my RT geek hat on: the song was written around 1990 and appeared on Thompson's 1991 album "Rumor & Sigh". As he split up with Linda in 1982, your memory must play you a trick.

At my age my memory plays tricks on me daily.

[JeffD]

Not to take away from all the other interpretations, and I think Chris Thile did a great job of putting heart and soul into his singing of the tune. But listen closely to Thompson's version, including his fingerpicking, and nothing will beat it for me. You can Bluegrass it up, but it's like trying to cover a Dylan song.

That is the wonder of music. You an make interpretations and add and subtract, without destroying the original.

While I enjoy the bluegrassy versions, a lot, I have to say the original RT does things for me that the others don't. There is a sensibility to the story that, to my experience, has its parallels in so many British folk songs and stories.

That is the whole thing about tradition - good music is good music and can be transported just about anywhere. But there is a "meaning" to a song or a tune, that comes directly from the tradition of which it is a part, and tapping into that meaning adds so much to the appreciation of it.

I am sure there are a few, if not many, British performers who have done, "You'll Never Leave Harlan Alive". And done it well. Very well. Made everyone appreciate it. But whoa, when it is done in its original context it can make you cry.

I am 100% behind sharing and appropriating songs, from everywhere, but I am also 100% behind enjoying what makes each of our traditions unique and wonderful.

There is another thread on the effects of homogenization of musics and cultures, and if it means some future listener won't be able to appreciate it in its original context, (which it need not BTW) then we have lost something important. IMO, YMMV etc. etc.