Tell Me :
Talk
But for all that material, the exile bonus CD was a bit weak. I think if they had stronger material amongst those hundreds of hours, we probably would have seen a bit more.
PMS was of course fantastic, and Following the River not bad, but not exactly a lot of other new songs.
Ugh. You put Plundererd in the same sentence as Following The Crap?
The three best tracks on the Exile extras is Plundered, Pass The Wine and I'm Not Signifying, which is the best track of the whole bunch.
I don't think it's a matter of 'there's nothing but crap' with the hours of tapes, it's that Mick, er, the Stones are playing things so (badly) incredibly safe that it's obnoxious. Especially considering that they left some of the best tracks off the extra Some Girls album in favor of some blather that is not even worthy of being a C-side anywhere.
Come on. Nobody complained about what The Beatles anthology series turned out to be. That is killer. That's just a bullshit excuse for not doing something as far as the Stones go. Certainly the Stones have something worthy of what the Beatles did with the anthologies. But even so they'd (Mick) undermine it by putting a bunch of crap on it.
So it goes.
I don't even mind the verbal onslaught as long as you're right Skippy!
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Why was Mick Taylor's recording 'Plundered my Soul' not promoted?
Posted by:
KeefintheNight82
()
Date: May 10, 2012 18:29
Just wondering, a couple years later, does anyone know a real reason why Taylor's involvement was not heavily promoted?
Former bandmates that come back for a one-off recording are usually marketed so all fans know about it. Peter Gabriel with the Genesis box sets for example.
Former bandmates that come back for a one-off recording are usually marketed so all fans know about it. Peter Gabriel with the Genesis box sets for example.
Re: Why was Mick Taylor's recording 'Plundered my Soul' not promoted?
Posted by:
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
()
Date: May 10, 2012 18:30
To give the (false, obviously) idea that it really was from 1971 and not new?
Re: Why was Mick Taylor's recording 'Plundered my Soul' not promoted?
Posted by:
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
()
Date: May 10, 2012 18:35
I never understood why the iTunes version was a different - and better - mix from the LP version.
Re: Why was Mick Taylor's recording 'Plundered my Soul' not promoted?
Posted by:
SweetThing
()
Date: May 10, 2012 18:40
Yes, this is the better version - in no small measure because Taylor is more prominent.
I wonder if Richards even knew Jagger had brought Taylor in for particular track.
We also have Don Was saying something like "I can neither deny nor confirm" Taylor's involvement when responding to the direct question.
Only later did Taylor and Jagger confirm.
Never mind not promoting, but what was the need for secrecy?
I wonder if Richards even knew Jagger had brought Taylor in for particular track.
We also have Don Was saying something like "I can neither deny nor confirm" Taylor's involvement when responding to the direct question.
Only later did Taylor and Jagger confirm.
Never mind not promoting, but what was the need for secrecy?
Re: Why was Mick Taylor's recording 'Plundered my Soul' not promoted?
Posted by:
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
()
Date: May 10, 2012 19:02
Wow. Never saw THIS. Was doesn't deny anything here. This says more than everything I read previously about the work they did for these extra Exile tracks:
Someone had already gone through the stuff 10 years ago, and they had some sense of what songs were there. They sent me four CDs full of material, and we sort of narrowed down the list. Then we asked to get the multi-tracks, and they just sent us a whole lot of stuff from the archives in England, all on a hard drive. Everything had been ripped and transferred over. So, I set about this task of going through 200-300 hours worth of multi-track tapes from that period. It was somewhat random... I don't think people knew exactly what was on every reel or anything, so there were a lot of surprises, and I had to go through everything... It took months.
Based on this it seems that Keith did not record additional acoustic on some track like he said he did:
Keith played on one song... He added a lead guitar part on "So Divine (Aladdin Story)." Mick Taylor came in and played lead guitar on "Plundered My Soul," and that was it. There were no other guitar overdubs. Bill Wyman and Charlie Watts didn't have to do anything, Nicky Hopkins couldn't do anything. It was all perfect...
[mog.com]
Someone had already gone through the stuff 10 years ago, and they had some sense of what songs were there. They sent me four CDs full of material, and we sort of narrowed down the list. Then we asked to get the multi-tracks, and they just sent us a whole lot of stuff from the archives in England, all on a hard drive. Everything had been ripped and transferred over. So, I set about this task of going through 200-300 hours worth of multi-track tapes from that period. It was somewhat random... I don't think people knew exactly what was on every reel or anything, so there were a lot of surprises, and I had to go through everything... It took months.
Based on this it seems that Keith did not record additional acoustic on some track like he said he did:
Keith played on one song... He added a lead guitar part on "So Divine (Aladdin Story)." Mick Taylor came in and played lead guitar on "Plundered My Soul," and that was it. There were no other guitar overdubs. Bill Wyman and Charlie Watts didn't have to do anything, Nicky Hopkins couldn't do anything. It was all perfect...
[mog.com]
Re: Why was Mick Taylor's recording 'Plundered my Soul' not promoted?
Posted by:
WeLoveYou
()
Date: May 10, 2012 19:12
So much stuff in the archives (100s of hours!) which may never see the light of day...
Re: Why was Mick Taylor's recording 'Plundered my Soul' not promoted?
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: May 10, 2012 19:57
Quote
WeLoveYou
So much stuff in the archives (100s of hours!) which may never see the light of day...
But for all that material, the exile bonus CD was a bit weak. I think if they had stronger material amongst those hundreds of hours, we probably would have seen a bit more.
PMS was of course fantastic, and Following the River not bad, but not exactly a lot of other new songs.
Re: Why was Mick Taylor's recording 'Plundered my Soul' not promoted?
Posted by:
vertigojoe
()
Date: May 10, 2012 21:46
"Never mind not promoting, but what was the need for secrecy?"
Well the need for secrecy was based on the fact that the stones tried to sell this release on the premise that these were extra original recordings from the magical french summer of 1971. They did it well, and the album went to No.1.
As for all this "100's of hours of archives" nonsense it'll all be bad jamming mainly, this is how they used to work remember, playing for hours til the magic struck them. So please dont carried away with the idea there's any great songs in there. If there was , you'd have heard em already.
Well the need for secrecy was based on the fact that the stones tried to sell this release on the premise that these were extra original recordings from the magical french summer of 1971. They did it well, and the album went to No.1.
As for all this "100's of hours of archives" nonsense it'll all be bad jamming mainly, this is how they used to work remember, playing for hours til the magic struck them. So please dont carried away with the idea there's any great songs in there. If there was , you'd have heard em already.
Re: Why was Mick Taylor's recording 'Plundered my Soul' not promoted?
Posted by:
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
()
Date: May 11, 2012 00:58
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
WeLoveYou
So much stuff in the archives (100s of hours!) which may never see the light of day...
But for all that material, the exile bonus CD was a bit weak. I think if they had stronger material amongst those hundreds of hours, we probably would have seen a bit more.
PMS was of course fantastic, and Following the River not bad, but not exactly a lot of other new songs.
Ugh. You put Plundererd in the same sentence as Following The Crap?
The three best tracks on the Exile extras is Plundered, Pass The Wine and I'm Not Signifying, which is the best track of the whole bunch.
I don't think it's a matter of 'there's nothing but crap' with the hours of tapes, it's that Mick, er, the Stones are playing things so (badly) incredibly safe that it's obnoxious. Especially considering that they left some of the best tracks off the extra Some Girls album in favor of some blather that is not even worthy of being a C-side anywhere.
Come on. Nobody complained about what The Beatles anthology series turned out to be. That is killer. That's just a bullshit excuse for not doing something as far as the Stones go. Certainly the Stones have something worthy of what the Beatles did with the anthologies. But even so they'd (Mick) undermine it by putting a bunch of crap on it.
So it goes.
Re: Why was Mick Taylor's recording 'Plundered my Soul' not promoted?
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: May 11, 2012 06:11
Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
WeLoveYou
So much stuff in the archives (100s of hours!) which may never see the light of day...
But for all that material, the exile bonus CD was a bit weak. I think if they had stronger material amongst those hundreds of hours, we probably would have seen a bit more.
PMS was of course fantastic, and Following the River not bad, but not exactly a lot of other new songs.
Ugh. You put Plundererd in the same sentence as Following The Crap?
The three best tracks on the Exile extras is Plundered, Pass The Wine and I'm Not Signifying, which is the best track of the whole bunch.
I don't think it's a matter of 'there's nothing but crap' with the hours of tapes, it's that Mick, er, the Stones are playing things so (badly) incredibly safe that it's obnoxious. Especially considering that they left some of the best tracks off the extra Some Girls album in favor of some blather that is not even worthy of being a C-side anywhere.
Come on. Nobody complained about what The Beatles anthology series turned out to be. That is killer. That's just a bullshit excuse for not doing something as far as the Stones go. Certainly the Stones have something worthy of what the Beatles did with the anthologies. But even so they'd (Mick) undermine it by putting a bunch of crap on it.
So it goes.
I don't even mind the verbal onslaught as long as you're right Skippy!
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
24FPS , 69firebird , alfstone , bigvis , brothersglims , Emily , fv , GravityBoy , Hanns Rainsch , His Majesty , JimmyShelter , JuanTCB , KRiffhard , maarisathena , marclaff , marko , NICOS , nikkibong , palerider22 , Paul Kersey , peter wilson , Rolling Hansie , rollingon , Ruskafarian , SirMuddy , Stoneage , stonemac , straycatuk , william060190
Guests:
226
Record Number of Users:
62
on May 24, 2013 23:32
Record Number of Guests:
247
on May 24, 2013 21:56
