LTK unused Eric Clapton instrumental possibly found? (UPDATE: authenticity confirmed)

24

Comments

  • MurdockMurdock Mr. 2000
    Posts: 16,183
    I downloaded the Sound Cloud version before it was taken down. I reuploaded it here just in case.

    https://ufile.io/8alodvxg
  • Posts: 5,863
    Thank you.

    This is from Reddit:
    I've also reached out to the original uploader, and their claim is that they have an original studio tape given to them by a former employee of the recording studio. It will be interesting to see if this is eventually verified
  • This instrumental is growing on me. I still don't see it working as the title song, but for a demo it's not bad. It maybe just needs to go somewhere different in the second half to sustain interest the whole four minutes.

    That would be kind of awkward though if Vic Flick's relative said this is too sloppy to be his and then Flick comes out himself and says, "Uh, yeah, it's ours."
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 6,832
    I thought he was referring to Clapton’s.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited February 2022 Posts: 12,052
    I guess Mr Flick hasn't heard it in 30 years so he might not even be sure if it does get to hear it!
  • I thought he was referring to Clapton’s.

    Sounds like they were referring to both.
  • edited February 2022 Posts: 5,863
    That would be kind of awkward though if Vic Flick's relative said this is too sloppy to be his and then Flick comes out himself and says, "Uh, yeah, it's ours."
    Haha!

    I thought he was referring to Clapton’s.
    You mean Clapton's relative? If so, I must clarify at this point that I contacted a relative of Vic Flick. It's just that in his reply, this person mentioned the piece was too sloppy for Clapton to have been involved in, and that Flick certainly wouldn't have been involved either. Perhaps the confusion came from the fact I mentioned Clapton first when talking about the reply I received, but I was just sticking to the way the original answer was worded.

    If the wording in my previous post is unclear I can improve it.

    For me, the issue is that I didn't get a sense that Vic Flick himself listened to the audio. It could be a fake, but if we're going to put the issue to bed, it would be good to do it in such a way that no doubts or ambiguities remain.

    Anyway, other people will make their own inquiries. In fact, Gergely Hubai, who I understand is a Bond music expert, said today on Facebook that "it's fake." I understand he's "in the know" about these things. I just wish we had a little more context and certainty about these claims.

    mtm wrote: »
    I guess Mr Flick hasn't heard it in 30 years so he might not even be sure if it does get to hear it!

    A nightmare scenario!
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited February 2022 Posts: 12,052
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Anyway, other people will make their own inquiries. In fact, Gergely Hubai, who I understand is a Bond music expert, said today on Facebook that "it's fake." I understand he's "in the know" about these things. I just wish we had a little more context and certainty about these claims.


    Thanks, I had a look for that. Frustratingly he doesn't say exactly who has told him it's not from the session- for me he's a bit of an unreliable source (another one!). One of his reasons for discounting it is that "if this was authentic, it would be released under the title Licence Revoked" which strikes me as a bit of a stupid point really: the fella put it up under the name Licence To Kill because that's what the film ended up being called and it's what we all know it as, he didn't claim that that had been written on the tape in 1989.
    So I don't know whether to buy what that guy says or not.

    https://www.facebook.com/groups/JBMAS/?multi_permalinks=5192347487471635
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 6,832
    I meant “Clapton’s work”.
  • edited February 2022 Posts: 5,863
    The YouTube video posted earlier today now says this:

    "Video unavailable
    This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by
    Michael Kamen"

    Link so you can check for yourself (in code tags so that it's not embedded):
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6o6BHRs0_A
    

    But I don't think that's proof of authenticity. Maybe in these kinds of situations, such videos can be taken down if they falsely claim to be somebody's else work, as they might be of low quality, and might be seen as potentially detrimental to the reputation of the composer falsely claimed to have composed the music.

    Edit: And if anyone is familiar with how these legal aspects work, feel free to correct me.

    I meant “Clapton’s work”.
    Gotcha. Then Flick's relative was talking about both Eric Clapton and Vic Flick.

    mtm wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Anyway, other people will make their own inquiries. In fact, Gergely Hubai, who I understand is a Bond music expert, said today on Facebook that "it's fake." I understand he's "in the know" about these things. I just wish we had a little more context and certainty about these claims.


    Thanks, I had a look for that. Frustratingly he doesn't say exactly who has told him it's not from the session- for me he's a bit of an unreliable source (another one!). One of his reasons for discounting it is that "if this was authentic, it would be released under the title Licence Revoked" which strikes me as a bit of a stupid point really: the fella put it up under the name Licence To Kill because that's what the film ended up being called and it's what we all know it as, he didn't claim that that had been written on the tape in 1989.
    So I don't know whether to buy what that guy says or not.

    https://www.facebook.com/groups/JBMAS/?multi_permalinks=5192347487471635
    I hadn't even seen that post. I had seen Hubai's comment on a post in the MI6 Facebook page, if I remember correctly.

    Anyway, I agree with your point about the title. As for his previous comment, it boils down to whether you can take this person as a reliable source on these things. From his interactions with the Bond community over the years, my understanding is that he is, but I haven't verified myself, to whatever extent I can.
  • ParallaxDGParallaxDG Canada
    Posts: 3
    Hello everyone, long time lurker here. I've been following mi6 for many years and enjoy reading the discussions here on the forums.

    I was the person who uploaded that YouTube video and I can confirm that a representative of Michael Kamen's issued a copyright strike on it, giving me one strike on my YouTube channel which to be honest I was expecting and that is entirely my fault. It seems that they really don't want anyone hearing this track which is a shame.
  • edited February 2022 Posts: 9,358
    Stupid question but on the new link if you click download mp3 does it work do you get an mp3 of the song cause I so want it

    In fact I will argue and say this is the best and most underrated bond theme since Another way to die

    And since I seem to be one of the few who love it are Bond Fans allergic to bad as guitar solos and riffs?
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 6,832
    It’s funny because John Barry himself also indulged in guitar riffing featured prominently in “He’s Dangerous”.

  • MurdockMurdock Mr. 2000
    Posts: 16,183
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Stupid question but on the new link if you click download mp3 does it work do you get an mp3 of the song cause I so want it

    Yep it's the song in MP3 form. :)
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 12,052
    ParallaxDG wrote: »
    Hello everyone, long time lurker here. I've been following mi6 for many years and enjoy reading the discussions here on the forums.

    I was the person who uploaded that YouTube video and I can confirm that a representative of Michael Kamen's issued a copyright strike on it, giving me one strike on my YouTube channel which to be honest I was expecting and that is entirely my fault. It seems that they really don't want anyone hearing this track which is a shame.

    Thanks for that; so that’s what the message said: ‘a representative of Michael Kamen’? I guess it’s hard to know if they are or not.
  • Posts: 5,863
    I don't trust that copyright strike. Some videos have been unfairly taken down from YouTube by people asking for money to stop doing it. I also remember a case in which an obscure song was uploaded to Spotify by some random person claiming to be the author and wishing to monetize it. This person was counting on the real creators not finding out about it to dispute the authorship. It goes to show you that the system is potentially easy to game in these kinds of things. There are too many songs on YouTube; their validation process is likely automated in some way, and how knows how reliable it is.

    Accordingly, Hubai wrote the same thing on Facebook. I don't know the specifics, but I think this takedown could be rubbish.

    Also, from reading the takedown text, it seems to me the video didn't get a content ID claim, which likely makes sense, since the theme has never had a commercial release. The YouTube algorithm probably can't compare the audio in the video with anything in their music database. That would mean someone manually filed a complaint about it, with the possibility of that complaint being illegitimate.

    If you don't buy that, there's also the possibility of a representative taking down a song because it's claiming to be something it's not and potentially going to make money from it, not necessarily because it's real.

    I will say that if the theme is fake, at least I got a cool theme out of it, I still have the elusive Clapton theme to look forward to (if they do release it) and it's been interesting to see how the whole situation develops. It's like the last time I was Rick Rolled. I laughed at the prank and got to listen to that cool Astley song, so I won out in the end.

    It does bother me that in some places where the theme was posted, barely any mention was made about the fact its authenticity had not been established.
  • Now this is a unique find! Fake or not, it's a curious listen and I've added it to the "rejected themes" section of my Bond playlist.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    Now this is a unique find! Fake or not, it's a curious listen and I've added it to the "rejected themes" section of my Bond playlist.

    Lol. Exactly! That's the spirit! Me too. I don't want to know if it's fake or not.
  • edited February 2022 Posts: 5,863
    I wonder what the melody would sound like played on wah wah trumpets, OHMSS-style. Maybe they would suit it well.

    Anyway, I'm happy some people got to enjoy the theme. It's also fun to stumble into something like this before the rest of the world.
  • ParallaxDGParallaxDG Canada
    edited February 2022 Posts: 3
    mtm wrote: »
    ParallaxDG wrote: »
    Hello everyone, long time lurker here. I've been following mi6 for many years and enjoy reading the discussions here on the forums.

    I was the person who uploaded that YouTube video and I can confirm that a representative of Michael Kamen's issued a copyright strike on it, giving me one strike on my YouTube channel which to be honest I was expecting and that is entirely my fault. It seems that they really don't want anyone hearing this track which is a shame.

    Thanks for that; so that’s what the message said: ‘a representative of Michael Kamen’? I guess it’s hard to know if they are or not.

    The email I received was from someone named "zoe" and the registered email was kamen.co.uk. I do not want to type out the actual full address in case they come for me.

    UPDATE: I did a quick google search and this "Zoe" is actually one of Kamen's daughters. This copyright strike is legitimate.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,198
    Isn't Michael Kamen dead? Curiouser and curiouser...
  • Posts: 5,863
    ParallaxDG wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    ParallaxDG wrote: »
    Hello everyone, long time lurker here. I've been following mi6 for many years and enjoy reading the discussions here on the forums.

    I was the person who uploaded that YouTube video and I can confirm that a representative of Michael Kamen's issued a copyright strike on it, giving me one strike on my YouTube channel which to be honest I was expecting and that is entirely my fault. It seems that they really don't want anyone hearing this track which is a shame.

    Thanks for that; so that’s what the message said: ‘a representative of Michael Kamen’? I guess it’s hard to know if they are or not.

    The email I received was from someone named "zoe" and the registered email was kamen.co.uk. I do not want to type out the actual full address in case they come for me.

    UPDATE: I did a quick google search and this "Zoe" is actually one of Kamen's daughters. This copyright strike is legitimate.

    If you want, you can run the email through an email checker, like this: https://email-checker.net/validate

    Also, that website (kamen.co.uk) has nothing in it. I don't what that means.

    Actually, Michael Kamen has a website: http://www.michaelkamen.com/ It needs Flash Player though. I remember visiting it. You can choose which background music to play. Either the Robin Hood theme or Fields of Joy.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited February 2022 Posts: 12,052
    It would be weird to go to all that trouble of setting up a fake domain to remove a youtube vid though. As long as the email address is one that YT then verifies and not just something someone types into the takedown request form, I don't know.
  • ParallaxDGParallaxDG Canada
    Posts: 3
    mattjoes wrote: »
    ParallaxDG wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    ParallaxDG wrote: »
    Hello everyone, long time lurker here. I've been following mi6 for many years and enjoy reading the discussions here on the forums.

    I was the person who uploaded that YouTube video and I can confirm that a representative of Michael Kamen's issued a copyright strike on it, giving me one strike on my YouTube channel which to be honest I was expecting and that is entirely my fault. It seems that they really don't want anyone hearing this track which is a shame.

    Thanks for that; so that’s what the message said: ‘a representative of Michael Kamen’? I guess it’s hard to know if they are or not.

    The email I received was from someone named "zoe" and the registered email was kamen.co.uk. I do not want to type out the actual full address in case they come for me.

    UPDATE: I did a quick google search and this "Zoe" is actually one of Kamen's daughters. This copyright strike is legitimate.

    If you want, you can run the email through an email checker, like this: https://email-checker.net/validate

    Also, that website (kamen.co.uk) has nothing in it. I don't what that means.

    Actually, Michael Kamen has a website: http://www.michaelkamen.com/ It needs Flash Player though. I remember visiting it. You can choose which background music to play. Either the Robin Hood theme or Fields of Joy.

    kamen.co.uk is not a website, it's the email domain. I used that checker and Zoe's email appears to be valid. I still think that it is legit and the Eric Clapton track is real.
  • edited February 2022 Posts: 5,863
    ParallaxDG wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    ParallaxDG wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    ParallaxDG wrote: »
    Hello everyone, long time lurker here. I've been following mi6 for many years and enjoy reading the discussions here on the forums.

    I was the person who uploaded that YouTube video and I can confirm that a representative of Michael Kamen's issued a copyright strike on it, giving me one strike on my YouTube channel which to be honest I was expecting and that is entirely my fault. It seems that they really don't want anyone hearing this track which is a shame.

    Thanks for that; so that’s what the message said: ‘a representative of Michael Kamen’? I guess it’s hard to know if they are or not.

    The email I received was from someone named "zoe" and the registered email was kamen.co.uk. I do not want to type out the actual full address in case they come for me.

    UPDATE: I did a quick google search and this "Zoe" is actually one of Kamen's daughters. This copyright strike is legitimate.

    If you want, you can run the email through an email checker, like this: https://email-checker.net/validate

    Also, that website (kamen.co.uk) has nothing in it. I don't what that means.

    Actually, Michael Kamen has a website: http://www.michaelkamen.com/ It needs Flash Player though. I remember visiting it. You can choose which background music to play. Either the Robin Hood theme or Fields of Joy.

    kamen.co.uk is not a website, it's the email domain. I used that checker and Zoe's email appears to be valid. I still think that it is legit and the Eric Clapton track is real.

    My mistake on the email.

    And that's fine, we have different points of view. Personally, I'll consider it unconfirmed and leave it at that, until someone in a position of authority says something. I feel we haven't reached that point yet.
  • edited February 2022 Posts: 5,863
    Vic Flick has said that from what he can remember, the SoundCloud track sounds nothing like the 1989 LTK sessions. His full comments can be found in the "James Bond Music" Facebook group.

    Edit: I have updated the first post with this development, as well as the title of the thread, to avoid misinformation.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited February 2022 Posts: 12,052
    Very interesting; thanks Matt :)

    That FB thread is slightly frustrating reading again: Mr Flick seems to have confirmed that the Bond theme wasn't actually used in the original piece, and the person on there who is apparently an expert and who claims to have heard it says 'yes that's what I said', but I can't see any trace him actually saying that! :D There are a lot of unreliable voices in this case!
  • I did find it a little too coincidental that the drums so closely mirrored music from GoldenEye N64. It's not like the composer of that game would have heard this lost piece of music from Licence to Kill. It's still a cool track though, whoever made it.
  • edited February 2022 Posts: 174
    This has grown on me quite a bit since it was posted, and I think I'm enjoying it more now that I know it's not real. I have to give credit to whoever made because there's a lot of pseudo-eighties synth pop out there at the moment and this sounds pretty authentic to me.
  • edited February 2022 Posts: 5,863
    For all we know, the whole track might have been lifted from a little-known album and passed off as the LTK instrumental.

    Until we find out, the damned track will have to be listed as "Unknown" in my collection. It deserves better.
Sign In or Register to comment.