Alansalbumarchives Hollies book

[stevie]

Some of you may be aware of alansalbumarchives.blogspot.com/ where he reviews his favourite artists, he's already released some books but his Hollies reviews should be released soon "Reflections of a time long past" is down for release in Mar 2019 and may include Allan Clarke solo work. If you scroll down the home page you will see the release list. I'm currently reading the George Harrison one bought from Amazon Uk

[Deleted]

It's a pity that these appear to be ebooks only. I might be interested if they were paperbacks.

[stevie]

I didn't really notice that Peter as i usually download books these days, it states somewhere that its 743 A4 pages and includes all solo and live track reviews.

[alansarchives]

Hi all and thanks for the interest in my book. Yes my self-published Hollies volume should be out on March 1st (depending on what mood the Amazon Kindle app is in!) Stevie - thankyou kindly for the plug and for buying my George Harrison book, I hope you enjoyed it. Peter - I do have plans to release all my books as physical copies but have run into all sorts of problems with the Amazon app that does it. My books are so long it looks as if I will have to split most volumes into two halves, which means a lot of re-designing and getting the front and back covers lined up is proving particularly difficult. I will get there though - it is my aim to concentrate on it fully once I have drafts for all my books finished which should be soon hopefully. I shall add an update here when I manage it!

Yes the book will indeed include reviews of all of six of Allan's solo albums (it took me a very long time to track down a copy of 'Reasons To Believe' but I got there in the end!) For anyone who hasn't seen my work (which is, I expect, the vast majority of you!) I look at each band's main albums in detail (7000-8000 words ish) and then have smaller reviews for all the 'extra' albums - things like the solo albums, 'Hollies Live Hits' and various compilations (all the significant ones anyway - if I reviewed every Hollies compilation I would never have to time to write about anything else!) There's also an extra section with five key concerts, three influences, three cover versions, DVDs, TV clips, outtakes, an essay, a 'thematic threads' section about various topics that crop up a lot in Hollie songs and a few other bits and pieces that got posted on my blog across the past eleven years.

I always stress I'm only a fan and only have access to what other fans have available to them so my writing will never be a 'must buy' in the same way that, say, Bobby's book on the band will be (when is that coming out?!?), but I find these reviews great fun to write as well as plugging my favourite music and a few readers have been kind enough to ask for them in book form. The Hollies were my first band in so many ways and I am deeply fond of them - I've never understood why they aren't better respected by the music world in general when they have a back catalogue that's so rich and deep and varied, even apart from all those famous hit singles. I always wanted to own a book about them too; I'm not going to be the first one anymore as I hoped when I started my project but I do think the more there is about The Hollies out there the better. I do hope that one or two curious fans who love the better-known bands I cover check The Hollies out and fall in love with them the way we all did.

Anyway thankyou for all the interest, I am flattered. Not many people take an interest in my work! A happy Hollie-day to you all! 8>)

[Deleted]

That's great Alan. I'll certainly grab The Hollies' book when published in paperback (possibly others too). Hope they sell well.

[alansarchives]

Thanks Peter! Hopefully it won't be too long before they are all out as physical copies too. There is a CSNY book in the series 'Change Partners' for anyone  in the forum interested in what Nash got up to post-Hollies too! www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07K3PDTRK/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_bibl_vppi_i8

[dirtyfaz]

I have a friend that self publishes his books. He has written more than 20 on West Coast music as well as a few on Australian Surf Music. It is almost impossible these days to get a publisher and so you have to self publish. Now that is an expensive task as the print run mostly would be fairly small and purchasers limited to serious devotees of the topic. As he is in Australia and the majority of his books were shipped overseas both with the printing costs and shipping costs the price became over the top. People wouldn't buy them unless they were a really really serious devotee.

He decided to go down the EBook path and has converted and made available just about all of his books that way. It also allowed him to change from b/w photos to colour and also to add many many additional photos to the book. Stuff you just couldn't get because of the prohibitive cost in production of a hard copy. He also has upgraded the information within his book because new information has come to light and he correct errors that may have been in the original book.
He prepares all his books as a PDF and makes them available through a company in the UK call payhip.com. Now there is a little work associated with getting the book ready using this method but there is also an amount of work associated with Kindle and a whole bunch of rules (also not everyone has a Kindle). He can even lock the PDF if he chooses or leave them unlocked to enable the purchaser to print their own if they so desire. He can charge a very reasonable cost and has found this method very successful.

When at the Hollies concert last week Bobby mentioned his book and mentioned he is looking for a publisher, then asked if there were any publishers in the audience. Now I immediately thought self published EBook. More money goes to the writer as well.

I have purchased several books now through Google Books. It takes a little getting used to the size of reading on a Kindle/Tablet but there wasn't any real difficulties. My only gripe with these purchases is that the graphics usually are not in colour when they easily could be. Just involves a little more preparation.

Just a few thoughts.

[dirtyfaz]

Allan, are you book also available through google play. I don't have a kindle but there are a couple of books I would purchase? If not any plans to?

[alansarchives]

Thankyou Dirtyfaz, that was exactly my way of thinking as well, I have a long list of different kindle stores online and other formats I can use in the future which very much includes Googlebooks. Like you say, each format takes time to get to grips with which is why I have concentrated on the biggest one with Amazon to start off with, but this has always been a long-term project and I plan to keep adapting my work for each one as I go and have more time to alter them. I do use a lot of colour in my work to separate the different types of album so the e-format is the best for me to use to use; that said I would like to have these books out as physical paperbacks too for readers who want something 'real' to hold!

[dirtyfaz]

Thanks for the response. I did actually mean Google Books not Google Play. You got it though.
The physical idea is good but I feel the biggest drawback here is twofold. One is the printing and shipping costs (overseas) and the other is actually the size of the market.

[alansarchives]

True. The good thing if I was to do it through Amazon is that they would print on demand rather than having piles of boxes of my work stored everywhere! The price would be high, but it might be worth it for the handful of people who prefer a copy to an ebook copy. At least if the ebooks are up as well at a more affordable price people have the opetion then. Thanks for your advice DirtyFaz.

[Deleted]

Feb 28, 2019 6:10:29 GMT alansarchives said:

True. The good thing if I was to do it through Amazon is that they would print on demand rather than having piles of boxes of my work stored everywhere! The price would be high, but it might be worth it for the handful of people who prefer a copy to an ebook copy. At least if the ebooks are up as well at a more affordable price people have the opetion then. Thanks for your advice DirtyFaz.

I recently published two books (with a third one probable in a couple of months or so), all through Amazon's print on demand service. My first one ('Channelling The Beat!') features over 700 pages, yet I can sell it at a low price (£21.49 in the UK) AND make a quick and tidy profit. This wouldn't be possible with a traditional publisher.

I don't even have an ebook reading device, nor do I want one.

[dirtyfaz]

Is the Amazon print on demand service a self print service or do they actually print a paper copy and ship it to you? I had never heard of that service before.

[alansarchives]

DirtyFaz - it is a print on demand service I think. You might find this link useful, though I haven't got to grips with it myself yet: kdp.amazon.com/en_US/help/topic/G202059560

Peter - Congratulations on your 'Channelling The Beat' book. It looks really good. If I can sell a few extra copies of mine I look forward to buying it soon! I must confess I didn't have a kindle until just before my first book came out.

[alansarchives]

Just to update everyone, 'Reflections Of A Long Time Past' is now available as an e-book via Amazon at the following links: www.amazon.com/dp/B07P74JDYL (USA), www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07P74JDYL (UK), www.amazon.de/dp/B07P74JDYL (Germany), www.amazon.fr/dp/B07P74JDYL (France), www.amazon.es/dp/B07P74JDYL (Spain), www.amazon.it/dp/B07P74JDYL (Italy), www.amazon.co.jp/dp/B07P74JDYL (Japan), www.amazon.nl/dp/B07P74JDYL (Netherlands), www.amazon.com.br/dp/B07P74JDYL (Brazil), www.amazon.ca/dp/B07P74JDYL (Canada) and www.amazon.com.mx/dp/B07P74JDYL (Mexico). Sadly the writing is only in English for now. I shall be back in touch when I manage to get a paperback copy working or another link somewhere else such as Googlebooks (thanks for the idea DirtyFaz!)

[Deleted]

Just glanced at the "look inside" feature, and this really does look superb! Non-album songs, band member profiles (yes, ALL members, former and current), solo recordings... can't wait for it to be published on paperback! I'm sure I'll be tempted by some of your other books too (certainly Paul McCartney).

[alansarchives]

Thanks Peter, I only have one more book to finish re-writing and then I can get stuck into creating the paperbacks!

[rokinrobinoflocksley]

Alan, that is one incredible book! Great googly moogly! I too will be holding out for a physical copy, can't wait to get one. Wishing you maximum success on this.

One thing I will chime in on, you appear to be using the "so-called but not really" 'official' UK chart positions for the 60s. As I have posted elsewhere, there were no 'official' charts (based on total sales of sampled record shops) until Feb 1969. Before that, there were 5 major independent charts over varying time periods, plus the BBC 'Pick of the Pops/Top of the Pops' average chart, which averaged together those 5 major charts. Melody Maker and NME sampled the most record shops during the 60s, up to around 300 and 200 respectively. Disc and Record Mirror up to around 100+. Record Retailer sampled the fewest, between 30 to 80. The Guinness books (in the mid/late 70s) chose NME to represent the 50s, and Record Retailer to represent the 60s. They did not declare these charts as 'official', they only stated which charts they were using for their books. The charts company that evolved into calling themselves 'The Official UK Charts Company" did not declare NME and Record Retailer as 'official' for the 50s & 60s until after 2001. But this was not historical truth, it is a rewritten lie.

The problem is the Record Retailer charts were the least accurate chart of the 60s, no one even knew who they were until around 1966-ish. You couldn't buy their music paper in the shops, you had to subscribe. Their chart position numbers disagreed the most compared to the other charts. For example, The Beatles 'Please Please Me' reached #1 for 2 weeks on NME, Melody Maker, and Disc, and for 3 weeks on the BBC chart. Yet only made it to #2 on Record Retailer. 270 sampled record shops said PPM was #1, 30 Record Retailer shops said it was #2, yet today everyone has been brainwashed into believing it was #2 based on the inferior Record Retailer chart, which absolutely no one followed back in 1963. Same thing with The Rolling Stones '19th Nervous Breakdown' in 1966. #1 for 3 weeks on NME, Melody Maker, Disc, and the BBC average. Yet only #2 on Record Retailer. 500+ shops said #1, 80 Record Retailer shops said #2, the lie is now being sold as the truth.

This impacts The Hollies as well. I will say that all of the charts are in general agreement as to the relative chart position peaks of each record, the problem occurs when some music critic/historian/author writes up how many #1 records an artist had, and they go quoting the least accurate chart. If you look at The Hollies UK 45 peaks on the other charts, 10 records peaked higher than the Record Retailer/'official' charts. As an advocate for The Hollies, I would think you would want to show the max chart peak across all the 60s charts. And possibly show the peaks on all charts.

Just an idea. Cheers n chips!

[knut]

On the NME chart I can't let go was no 1 for 2 weeks but only no 2 of the "official" chart.

[alansarchives]

Hi Robin - thankyou for your kind words. Googly moogly I seem to have a lot more attention for my Hollies book than my last nine!

Yes I agree with you re the charts. It is a very thorny issue. My early drafts had a long page about exactly the point you make and how different people support different charts but my target group (i.e. my small handful of anorakky friends) said it was a bit too much and suggested I cut it. I did realise about the variety between the charts but most sources for better or worse seem to follow Guinness books these days and if I'd have gone with the 'other' charts I would have had readers writing in asking why my sources clashed with others they read. The other debate is which chart do I use instead of the Guinness ones? As you say there are five alternatives and finding material on all of them is difficult - there is no agreement which is what the Guinness books struggled with of course. I agree with wanting to promote The Hollies - but at the same I'm of the generation where the 'He Ain't Heavy' re-issue meant The Hollies had the longest gap between chart #1s (with 'I Can't Let Go'). I was, err, reluctant to let that bit go too as it were.

I will add maybe a shorter paragraph explaining this in the next edition of the book. Thanks for the idea! Chips 'n' Hicks!

[dirtyfaz]

Does it not take up too much space when listing the Official Guinness (dubious) position and then just say adding NME and Melody Maker positions maybe even Disc as well. Me personally, I would do that if writing about whatever band because I would like to give an overall picture of chart positions and also it would show a clearer picture of reality.

I am in Australia and back in the 60s our newsagents sold those 3 music magazines and that was how we kept up with what was going on in the UK. They were air freighted out here and on our news stands maybe 1 or 2 weeks after the UK published date. I had never even heard of Record Retailer until the Guinness book came out.

[rokinrobinoflocksley]

Mar 2, 2019 20:23:27 GMT alansarchives said:

Hi Robin - thankyou for your kind words. Googly moogly I seem to have a lot more attention for my Hollies book than my last nine!

Yes I agree with you re the charts. It is a very thorny issue. My early drafts had a long page about exactly the point you make and how different people support different charts but my target group (i.e. my small handful of anorakky friends) said it was a bit too much and suggested I cut it. I did realise about the variety between the charts but most sources for better or worse seem to follow Guinness books these days and if I'd have gone with the 'other' charts I would have had readers writing in asking why my sources clashed with others they read. The other debate is which chart do I use instead of the Guinness ones? As you say there are five alternatives and finding material on all of them is difficult - there is no agreement which is what the Guinness books struggled with of course. I agree with wanting to promote The Hollies - but at the same I'm of the generation where the 'He Ain't Heavy' re-issue meant The Hollies had the longest gap between chart #1s (with 'I Can't Let Go'). I was, err, reluctant to let that bit go too as it were.

I will add maybe a shorter paragraph explaining this in the next edition of the book. Thanks for the idea! Chips 'n' Hicks!

Alan, I would suggest using the fewest words to get across the main point, and refer readers to this article written by UK chart expert/guru Alan Smith.  He spent years investigating the charts, talking to those who put them together at the various music papers.  Article here:

www.ukmix.org/showthread.php?98104

Also check out this thread here on this forum for a previous discussion of charts:

elevatedobservations.proboards.com/thread/305/charting-singles

Here's a link to chart peaks of all UK records 1952-1979 across the multiple charts, doesn't have the BBC peaks, doesn't continue Melody Maker past 1969 though they went to 1988.  Don't know how accurate this is, I have found some bugs.  Again, the 'official' charts didn't start until Feb 1969.

www.dropbox.com/s/keco7en8klgx602/TiscaliUKRecordsAllChartsByArtistLastNameDateJW.xlsx?dl=0

Or for your book, just list each Hollies record max peak from whichever 60s UK chart it occurred; or list the max peaks from all UK 60s charts.  Or the max peaks across the most accurate chart of the 60s, which would be Melody Maker, as they sampled the most record shops of any of the music papers during The Hollies 60s chart runs, almost 4 times as many shops as Record Retailer.  You owe your loyalty to The Hollies, ha, not to bogus Record Retailer/'official' charts.  I'm sure no would would not buy your book based on more accurate chart positions.  Let 'em complain, tell them the truth, that the 'official' 60s charts are a revised historical lie.

Another chart tidbit:  The "In The Hollies Style" LP did not chart on the Record Retailer/'official' album chart, which was a Top 20 chart.  It did chart on the NME album chart, which was only a Top 10 chart.  Its chart run (starting 24 Oct 1964) went:  7-9-9-10-6.  So despite Record Retailer having 10 more positions than NME, it still didn't chart anywhere.  RR was sampling 75-85 shops per week at this time, NME over 100 sometimes as high as 200 shops per week.  Conclusion:  Record Retailer/'official' is not the best representative UK chart of the 60s, it disagrees the most with the other charts of the day, it is the outlier.  (I don't have the Melody Maker album charts for late 1964, so I don't know if "In The Hollies Style" charted there or not; it was a Top 10 chart at that time).

For the ultimate weekly UK charts of the 60s, for accuracy and the most chart positions, Melody Maker should be used in its entirety for the upper positions, then tack on the lower Record Retailer positions.  Albums and singles.

Crisps n smarties...

[moorlock2003]

As usual, it looks like the US gets ignored. What else is new? Pay You Back with Interest, Dear Eloise, Long Cool woman, Long Dark Road, and Magic Woman Touch were all bigger hits in the US (or weren't released as singles in the UK) yet this doesn't seem to register as being important. I beg to differ.

[alansarchives]

Moorlock - Rather than confusing readers with lots of charts I only use an artist's home country in each of my books (there are thirty books in all). It is only the chart discography so readers can click on the songs they know quickly. Every single song The Hollies ever did is in the book not just the singles so all the songs you mention have their own section. To me every song is important - A side, B side, album track, unreleased song, live recording, solo track, that's why they are all in my books complete.

[Deleted]

Alan, I think it's important that you publish the book that YOU want published. I personally usually include both UK and US chart positions in my books to give TV appearances a little context, but I don't think it's essential for your review type books.

Incidentally, in addition to Simon (who is working on a book), I can think of at least three other people on here who are more than capable of writing books. Yes, it takes a lot of time and effort, but it is something that doesn't cost the writer anything if using POD (print on demand) via Amazon as I do, it can potentially make a little money too! Certainly there needs to be more books on (or featuring) The Hollies.