Jump to content
aberdeen-music
Sign in to follow this  
delboy

poor old cliff richard...

Recommended Posts

thwarted in his attempt to become the only artist to have number one hit records in the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's and noughties by those evergreen whippersnappers take that, with the x factor single getting unleashed this week, sir clifford has no chance of getting that elusive noughties number one!!!

although i do believe he is the only artist to have a number one in the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's but to get one in the noughties as well would have been some achievement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard his single played on radio 2, it was a quite weird to be honest.

I don't think Cliff is ever going to beat Take That nowadays.

It's already an achievement to get number 1's in the 50's,60's,70's,80's and 90's though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes i know the noughties aren't over, me point was that this christmas was his best chance in years to get that elusive noughties number one and it may prove to be best chance.

and yes royalties do run out after 50 years, there's a massive campaign going on (not sure if cliff is involved, i think he is but paul mccartney is deffo campaigning to extend it to 100 years (inbetween fighting heather in court)).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DustyDeviada

He was only a couple of weeks off getting a number one in the noughties as well, Millenium Prayer was number one in December 1999, but I think the Spice Girls knocked it off.

I think Macca and Cliff are fair enough on the copyright thing, apart from anything else whenever anything goes out of copyright you always get loads of companies reducing crappy cash-in versions of it for sale in places like Bargain Books and Asda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He was only a couple of weeks off getting a number one in the noughties as well, Millenium Prayer was number one in December 1999, but I think the Spice Girls knocked it off.

I think Macca and Cliff are fair enough on the copyright thing, apart from anything else whenever anything goes out of copyright you always get loads of companies reducing crappy cash-in versions of it for sale in places like Bargain Books and Asda.

although it does lend something to artistic re-interpritation without hefty legal bills sorting out clearance and royalties amongst lots of people.

As far as I knew though the PRS thing was 50 years after the death of the original composer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest, if he gains a number one through that single, there's something far wrong with the ears of the nation. It's probably the worst thing he's produced, almost like all his over songs combined into some giant, fire breathing lizard, wailing some form of pop chart mantra while laying waste to downtown Tokyo.

Still, I suppose the Young Ones version of Living Doll was good for a few laughs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He was only a couple of weeks off getting a number one in the noughties as well, Millenium Prayer was number one in December 1999, but I think the Spice Girls knocked it off..

it was westlife (what the fuck is a westlife it makes no sense at all...) and they're kareoke version of 'seasons in the sun' incidently it was the last time i remember actually getting excited about the xmas number one - it was a four horse race with cliff, westlife, a re-issue of 'imagine' and the cuban boys 'hamster song' all vying for top spot. them were the days!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To be honest, if he gains a number one through that single, there's something far wrong with the ears of the nation. It's probably the worst thing he's produced, almost like all his over songs combined into some giant, fire breathing lizard, wailing some form of pop chart mantra while laying waste to downtown Tokyo.

Still, I suppose the Young Ones version of Living Doll was good for a few laughs.

there's something wrong with the nation when they keep spending their cash on nonsense like the x factor winner every year now. i mean this years x factor song is beyond cringeworthy, i don't mind '21st century christmas' at least cliff is attempting to be modern, he even mentions DVD's in the lyrics, thus proving he's down with the youth of today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
there's something wrong with the nation when they keep spending their cash on nonsense like the x factor winner every year now. i mean this years x factor song is beyond cringeworthy, i don't mind '21st century christmas' at least cliff is attempting to be modern, he even mentions DVD's in the lyrics, thus proving he's down with the youth of today.

Making it all the more cringeworthy.

It also seems to have every xmas cliche in the book. I think he's also doing some sort of duet with Daniel O Donnell. Now that would be a sight to see!

Bah Humbug!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Making it all the more cringeworthy.

It also seems to have every xmas cliche in the book. I think he's also doing some sort of duet with Daniel O Donnell. Now that would be a sight to see!

Bah Humbug!!!

it might be on cliff's recent 'duets' album! be funny if cliff n daniel did something hardcore (i'll leave it to your own imagination!) :up:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DustyDeviada
he even mentions DVD's in the lyrics, thus proving he's down with the youth of today.

Classic post!

To be honest, I only found out yesterday that this thread was inspired by the fact that Cliff had entered the chart at number two. Even accounting for the fact that it's almost impossible to buy singles anywhere nowadays, that's quite a feat, 48 years on from his first hit.

The fact that the song is abysmal just makes it even more impressive IMO.

I gave up worrying about the tastes of the record buying public ages ago, the fact that the X Factor pap will sell millions this week is ample proof of how silly most people are, I feel it's best just to affect an air of superiority, safe in the knowledge that I have decent taste in music.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

downloads count in the singles chart nowadays. i did see a copy of '21st century christmas' in tescos last week - there's a new version of his 1st hit 'move it' on the CD single featuring brian may (lets face it may's diary is very extremely free these days and he'll work with anyone if the money's right!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yes i know the noughties aren't over, me point was that this christmas was his best chance in years to get that elusive noughties number one and it may prove to be best chance.

and yes royalties do run out after 50 years, there's a massive campaign going on (not sure if cliff is involved, i think he is but paul mccartney is deffo campaigning to extend it to 100 years (inbetween fighting heather in court)).

It was Cliff who was at the forefront of it, I don't think Macca has been publically involved in it...too much other shit to deal with...er the ex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a difference between the copyright on the music, and the copyright on the recording. (You'll see two signs on CD labels - a circled C for the music copyright, and a circled P for the copyright of the recorded performance.)

Copyright on the song for example runs out 70 years after the author's death. However the copyright on the actual recording runs out 50 years after the recording is released. So this is not about losing the rights to songs you've written, more about how long you can claim money for one performance you laid down 50 years ago. In fact, in a lot of cases the rights to the recording are not owned by the musician, but the record company. The main beneficiaries of extending this will be the record companies, meaning they can sit back and rake in the cash without having to invest in anything new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not being the musical lothario that cliff is, my opinion may not be as strongly as accepted as his... but, if all he is aiming for is a number on to get his record of each decade, then perhaps releasing yet another single the week before christmas isn't the best idea in the world.

if he just wants a number one then why doesn't he just release any odd dross a week when the charts are dead i.e. like february. Just have a look at the release schedule, pick a week where mcfly, westlife, take that or indeed "generic faceless dance act of the week" don't have anything out, and ta-dah there you go cliff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole copyright system is fairly bizarre. It needs to be changed for our modern times. I doubt any change likely to happen will bring any real advantage to most professional musicians.

Hopefully we have seen the demise of the extreme copyright lobby that were prominant a few years a go. They possibly are still around asking for software patents and such but I haven't heard much about it for a couple of years.

I can forsee the day where bands that record music in cakewalk sonar will have to pay money to cakewalk when they sell records and writers who typed their novels in a certain type of software will no longer own copyright to their novels.

On a more related note. I don't see a problem with extending royalties to the lifetime of the composer, at the very shortest. Maybe then allowing them to be inheriated by children and widdows after their death.

50 years vs 70 years vs 90 years. I don't see the point of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a more related note. I don't see a problem with extending royalties to the lifetime of the composer, at the very shortest. Maybe then allowing them to be inheriated by children and widdows after their death.

But royalties are valid for the lifetime + 70 years of the composer. It's only the copyright of a particular recording that lasts 50 years, and as Frosty said in most instances that's signed over to the record company. So the children and widows wouldn't benefit at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...