Music Radar: John Porter on shaping The Smiths’ most iconic tracks, and why he’s auctioning a treasure trove of original acetates (January 22, 2025)

2nDuV8Kq2svSaULrZpb22C-970-80.jpg.webp


“I don't think Morrissey liked me. I don't think he liked my friendship with Johnny”: Producer John Porter on shaping The Smiths’ most iconic tracks, and why he’s auctioning a treasure trove of original acetates


(Archived version)

Very interesting recent interview stemming from the upcoming auction.
FWD.


Related item:
 
Another day, another person throwing shade at Morrissey to satisfy a tired media narrative. I get that Porter has mentioned this before, but why keep harping about it? To get social brownie points for reinforcing the villainization of Moz, I guess. Very cool. Just sell your shit, dork.
 
songwriting credits are distinct

From 'arranger' credits, I assume you mean. The point being that maybe they shouldn't always be, or that in this case perhaps 'arranger' doesn't adequately describe Porter's input. We can haggle over semantics, but what it boils down to is that Marr has never produced music in his own right as rich and well-constructed and harmonically sophisticated as the music he co-produced with Porter. And, going by Porter's input as he describes it in this interview, and has done many times before, I'd say he merits a co-creation credit for the music in its finished form (along with Rourke). Again, I'd say a 'song' is distinct from the music anyway, and that the 'song' credit should go to Morrissey alone, for having created the lyrics and vocal melody.
 
John Porter is probably my least favourite individual central to the Smiths story. He made a pig's ear of the debut album and though some of his production of various singles is fine he was outshone by Stephen Street's later work.
 
The quotes below make it clear why Porter deserved a songwriting co-credit for The Smiths songs he worked on - or, as I've always argued, why the credit should have been 'Music by Marr, Porter, Rourke', 'Song (i.e. vocal melodies and lyrics) by Morrissey'.

"They didn’t really know about recording. They didn’t know about overdubbing or about song structure or anything, Johnny would just play a riff which would go on for two and a half minutes, Morrissey would sing over it, and that was it. I tried to bring in some light and shade, because they didn't necessarily have verses and choruses as such in their songs, so I used to try and arrange the dynamics of the song. That's why we came across a sort of formula of having a guitar intro, a breakdown in the middle and a ‘re-intro’."

"We'd make the guitar lines play in a lower register below the vocal during the 'verse' and then break out into a higher register during the 'choruses', adding harmonics, backwards echo and doubled melodic hooks etc (all on the guitar)"

"There were certain parts of the song I would try and build up more, so that there was more of a sense of tension and some release from it to make it more of a pleasant journey, rather than such a linear thing"

"The band didn’t really do demos, but usually they’d have a basic idea or a structure of whatever song they wanted to do, but with How Soon is Now? there were no pre-conceptions. I never heard a demo. [Johnny Marr recalls demo’ing the track, then dubbed ‘Swamp’ before the recording session, before building up the song into the tremolo-daubed monster it became with John, Ed]"

“I programmed the LinnDrum (again!) congas, shakers and cowbell and tambourine. to get a groove thing going in the room. Those elements remained in the final mix.

“Johnny will probably dispute this but I remember sitting in the studio playing That’s All Right Mama on the guitar, saying to him ‘let’s do something like this, just stay on the one chord (F#) for a bit. ’I remember asking Johnny if he had any other licks, and he had this thing that was in a high register. It actually sounded a bit like William, but I asked him to play it two octaves down and slow it right down. That would become the B-section. So, they all started playing, along with the box and what you hear is , after an amount of tinkering, the eventual result.”

“A lot of the dynamic arrangement and sequencing was assembled in the mix, The band didn’t play it quite as it sounds. For the re-intro, I just switched out the drums and the bass and let the guitar play on its own.”
It's called producing. You don't get a songwriting credit for it, just a producing credit (which Porter did).
 
Great read. Funny how little experience and lucky circumstance got things started in the early days.
 
The poetic lyric writing CLEARLY doesn't interest Morrissey anymore and hasn't for YEARS. I am genuinely interested in your opinion here. What is your opinion on why Morrissey completely changed his writing style? Does he no longer like poetry?
Morrissey's last studio album, I am Not a Dog on a Chain is highly poetic. Nearly all of the songs could exist as poems, Once I Saw the River Clean being the best example (as well as best song).
 
John Porter is probably my least favourite individual central to the Smiths story. He made a pig's ear of the debut album and though some of his production of various singles is fine he was outshone by Stephen Street's later work.
He did a better job than Troy Tate. And the question as to just how much he created, or contributed to, the distinctive sound of How Soon Is Now? is an interesting one.
 
Just wanted to say how happy I am that this treasure trove was found by Porter's sister and saved from the trash bin. And that John Porter (age 77) is able to benefit financially from the auction.
 
All the information about recording is interesting. So Mike played to a Linn drum track and for that he got 25%?

It's nothing more than a glorified metronome, really - and, unless there is an artistic choice to include it, it never appears on the final track. Even some of the best drummers will play to a click track in the studio or live. It has nothing to do with their innate ability as a drummer or whether or not they can "deliver the goods" - it keeps the rhythm steady and even from take to take, which ultimately makes all the musicians steadier and makes the producer's/engineers' jobs easier. There is then more flexibility to cut and comp different takes together if parts of multiple performances make for the best ultimate master.
 
Just imagine what would have happened if the Troy Tate produced album had been released. The Smiths might have been DOA. Porter did a very good job indeed at helping them find their sound. It wasn't perfect - few debut albums are - but he very much helped make their debut the success it was. The difference between this and what Porter did is like the difference between night and day.

 
It's nothing more than a glorified metronome, really - and, unless there is an artistic choice to include it, it never appears on the final track. Even some of the best drummers will play to a click track in the studio or live. It has nothing to do with their innate ability as a drummer or whether or not they can "deliver the goods" - it keeps the rhythm steady and even from take to take, which ultimately makes all the musicians steadier and makes the producer's/engineers' jobs easier. There is then more flexibility to cut and comp different takes together if parts of multiple performances make for the best ultimate master.

It’s mentioned in the article that Linn drums were used as the basic drum track for This Charming Man that Andy and Johnny played. That’s different than using it as a click track. It meant the drums were not part of creative building of the track that the musicians interact with. They were added later which any session musician could have done.
 
I think most of the material on reels will be of interest, but as observed from prior auctions: seldom (if ever?) has a collector transfered the purchased reel for others to hear.
I'd guess the copyright caveat is cut and paste, but it's a bit easier to trace someone post-auction in this situation than with a 'leak'.
When 80's I et al were bootlegging, the idea was to share fan to fan - far and wide (and maybe make a meager profit). Similarly, as analogue gave way to digital, it became much easier/faster to do said (minus the profit). These items will require effort to preserve and it's beyond doubtful that anyone spending a couple of K+ are going to do so.
I'd love to be wrong.
Regards,
FWD.

Baffles me how the seller who has the musical capabilities to digitally preserve them doesn’t do so before they’re sold.
 
It’s mentioned in the article that Linn drums were used as the basic drum track for This Charming Man that Andy and Johnny played. That’s different than using it as a click track. It meant the drums were not part of creative building of the track that the musicians interact with. They were added later which any session musician could have done.
From the article:

"I went back up to Manchester, and booked a day at Strawberry Studios. I’d recently got a LinnDrum and I copied Mike's drum parts from the track we'd done in London, and asked Johnny and Andy to play along with it. I overdubbed the drums last.

“My theory always was (and still is) if you can’t dance to it, it’s no good. So we recorded the song again - the track was a bit simpler, but the arrangement was the same. The London version had the same basic arrangement, but what we did in Manchester was a bit smoother and a bit cleaner.


"We used the LinnDrum as a click on all the subsequent tracks I did with the band I think, though maybe one or two didn't have a click."

The overdubbed drums on the Manchester/single version are unquestionably Mike. And "any session player" would have played them differently and, most importantly, it wouldn't be the version we know & love.

The drum part on the London version is the one with the drum machine. "Golden Lights" also used a drum machine. Even so, two isolated incidences don't invalidate Mike Joyce's contribution to the the complete discography.
 
Just imagine what would have happened if the Troy Tate produced album had been released. The Smiths might have been DOA. Porter did a very good job indeed at helping them find their sound. It wasn't perfect - few debut albums are - but he very much helped make their debut the success it was. The difference between this and what Porter did is like the difference between night and day.



I'll have to listen again as it's been years since I've heard it. No question the Porter version is better but I do recall preferring a couple of the Troy Tate songs. It's easy to compare both and come to the conclusion that Porter's is better... but if you only had one - Troy Tate's - it's harder to say. If it had been Troy Tate's version released - maybe the debut wouldn't have been as well regarded - but they would have recovered with Hatful and MiM. In other words, I don't think it would have been a huge disaster for them.
 
But Porter is just relating his experience - why criticize him for it and not reflect on Morrissey treating him with 'utter disdain"? The reason M is criticized or unpopular with his peers is because he has a very long history of treating people badly. The problem cannot always be 'them'.
I don't think it is always 'them'. Even Street said working with Moz is like walking on eggshells.

I feel like Morrissey's very sensitive and he's overly protective of himself and those he cares for. At that time, it was the band, especially Marr. However, Street wasn't flippant about Morrissey and can recall good times with him. Why couldn't Porter do the same? Why dish out the same old, "oh Moz didn't like me" or "Moz didn't like my friendship with Marr" and "I don't like the guy"? I just feel like the negativity is blazing and it doesn't have to be, but it seems like that's all people want to focus on when remembering the Smiths and it's hardened Morrissey over time. That's why we have an album called Viva Hate and it's also why Morrissey refers to 1988 as 198-hate. He felt hated.

What's the big deal? He wanted to give an accurate description of his memories of that time. Why should he self censor? He doesn't say anything particularly bitchy or nasty.
Even you stated it: Marr is affable and Morrissey is difficult. News Flash. Something like that, anyway. As in, yeah - we get it.

It gets tiring after a while, but no, he shouldn't self censor. He should continue to talk about how Morrissey's eyes glazed over while all the other Smiths were quick to learn and had that special "spark". I dare say that spark got them far after Johnny up and left, though. Looks like Moz is the one who set everyone on fire.

I feel like there's a Marr vs. Morrissey movement about to happen. I know someone personally who is exactly like Johnny Marr. She was my best friend. She'd sacrifice anything just as long as she is the center of attention and known as the one who made it all work. The good egg.
Once I saw the river clean
Scratching up the latest scheme

Time will come but it hasn't yet
Someone's out to get me
Morrissey says that everything we need to know is in his songs. You can see what I'm talking about here in bold from your post.
 
I don't think it is always 'them'. Even Street said working with Moz is like walking on eggshells.

I feel like Morrissey's very sensitive and he's overly protective of himself and those he cares for. At that time, it was the band, especially Marr. However, Street wasn't flippant about Morrissey and can recall good times with him. Why couldn't Porter do the same? Why dish out the same old, "oh Moz didn't like me" or "Moz didn't like my friendship with Marr" and "I don't like the guy"? I just feel like the negativity is blazing and it doesn't have to be, but it seems like that's all people want to focus on when remembering the Smiths and it's hardened Morrissey over time. That's why we have an album called Viva Hate and it's also why Morrissey refers to 1988 as 198-hate. He felt hated.


Even you stated it: Marr is affable and Morrissey is difficult. News Flash. Something like that, anyway. As in, yeah - we get it.

It gets tiring after a while, but no, he shouldn't self censor. He should continue to talk about how Morrissey's eyes glazed over while all the other Smiths were quick to learn and had that special "spark". I dare say that spark got them far after Johnny up and left, though. Looks like Moz is the one who set everyone on fire.

I feel like there's a Marr vs. Morrissey movement about to happen. I know someone personally who is exactly like Johnny Marr. She was my best friend. She'd sacrifice anything just as long as she is the center of attention and known as the one who made it all work. The good egg.

Morrissey says that everything we need to know is in his songs. You can see what I'm talking about here in bold from your post.

It's like you're trying to shut down free speech. What gets tiring are the tireless defenders of Morrissey who can't accept that maybe some people don't like him b/c he didn't treat them well (or at least that's how they genuinely feel). He should say whatever he wants to say on the subject - it's his right. Just as it's yours to ignore it or not take it seriously.
 

Trending Threads

Back
Top Bottom