Comments, input and alterations are very welcome!
________________________________________________________________________________

Look What You’ve Done
(McKinley Morganfield)

Chess Studios, Chicago, Illinois, US, June 11, 1964

Mick Jagger - vocals
Keith Richards - electric guitar
Charlie Watts - drums
Bill Wyman - bass
Brian Jones - harmonica
Ian Stewart - piano

Now, look what you've done
Now, look what you've done
Look what you've done, baby
Now, look what you've done
You left me here, the lonely one
And all I can say is look what you've done

A broken heart
A worried mind
Because of you, baby
Dying all the time
I once had a dream, but now I've none
Your taking your love and see what it done

I saw you last night
Out moving round
With your new toy
You paint the town
That is OK, you're having your fun
Because some day they call you done

And now your bird cries
The shadow falls
Gloomy memories
And I recall
Your love is my life, as warm as the sun
But now it is gone and see what it done

Produced by Andrew Loog Oldham

First released on:
The Rolling Stones - “December’s Children” LP
(London PS 451) US, December 4, 1965

Very nice harp on this one...Brian?

2 1 2 0

ahhh listen to how that handful of skinny English cats just loooooooves to play the blues -
they'll go far. you can hear it.

Nice b-side. Definitely not an album track but one that probably captures what the band sounded like live around 63.

One of Brian's coolest harp arrangements. That magical way of adding sophistication to the blues without losing the feeling. I have a real soft spot for those Blues Wailin' Rollin' Stones.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-09-03 11:41 by 24FPS.

Always enjoyed this tune and especially the harmonica. Not released in the UK untill the 70's, I think.

With "Confessin' The Blues", it is one their most convincing blues readings of their early days (or ever). Actually as a blues band I don't think they ever got any better than they were in those two day Chess sessions. I think everything is perfect in this track - the band plays so tightly and each player supports the whole perfectly. They probably would never been as tight as they then were. They had just had their club days behind and were a trimmed team, and by being inspired by the very place they were at - and who knows under whose eyes - they really work hard. But still they sound so relaxed and cool, keeping the nuances in hand, and adding that charming original touch of theirs. (But like said, they have never been so well prepared and rehearsed when entering a studio as they then were.)

Of course, as a track it really didn't have much commercial appeal. I guess ALO was very well awere of that, and it was released as an album filler in DECEMBER'S CHILDREN some 18 months later (right?).

I have always viewed that those Chess sessions were a kind of end of era experience for the band. There they finally fulfilled all their blues passions, they showed everything they know, and somehow get also rid of that of their system, and were ready to conquer new fields. The things were happening so fast then for them. I wonder was ALO really so smart that he gave this opportunity to them, halfly as a gift (knowing their blues fanatism), but also that of thinking "okay play this blues as much as you want now, and let us do something else next."

Anyway, a piece like "Look What You've Done" shows that as a band they were really ready and had a cohesion in their sound, which I think would take years they would achieve again - thanks to the hectic life in studio and concerts (and everywhere) from then on. For example, as a band they degenerated quite a lot if we compare their performances and records from 1964 to 1965 (BBC radio shows offers a good evidence). My guts is that it would take not until 1969 they would find that level of cohesion in their sound they had mastered in 1964 - after playing their hearts out in English club circuit.

I suppose those Chess sesions might have been the personal highlight of Brian Jones's career as a Rolling Stone - damn one can hear how he lets his soul to be heard through his harmonica!

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-09-03 14:46 by Doxa.

Not very strong vocal delivery from Mick, lacks passion too controlled. But what a band! Maybe its the contrast between the two performances (band and vocals) that sounds strange. If Mick only let himself go a little ... (as he did on That's how strong my love is).

C

Quote
liddas
Not very strong vocal delivery from Mick, lacks passion too controlled. But what a band! Maybe its the contrast between the two performances (band and vocals) that sounds strange. If Mick only let himself go a little ... (as he did on That's how strong my love is).

C

Hmm.. I can't agree with that. For me Jagger sounds fantastic, controlling brilliantly the nuances of his unique voice. It is that 'let's hold the horses a bit' which makes is even more threatening, almost aggressive. That guy can express so much even with so little effort, trusting just his own natural voice. (But if one wants to hear a really bad Jagger vocal performance, listen "I Can't Be Satisfied" from the same sessions.)

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-09-03 13:34 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
liddas
Not very strong vocal delivery from Mick, lacks passion too controlled. But what a band! Maybe its the contrast between the two performances (band and vocals) that sounds strange. If Mick only let himself go a little ... (as he did on That's how strong my love is).

C

Hmm.. I can't agree with that. For me Jagger sounds fantastic, controlling brilliantly the nuances of his unique voice. It is that 'let's hold the horses a bit' which makes is even more threatening, almost aggressive. That guy can express so much even with so little effort, trusting just his own natural voice. (But if one wants to hear a really bad Jagger vocal performance, listen "I Can't Be Satisfied" from the same sessions.)

- Doxa

Hmm, and I cant quite agree with that. Jagger does "atisfied" much in Muddy's vocal style which isn't overloaded. I hear it as a bit of a tribute; where the singer lets the song, and the guitar shine Latter day Blues singers often feel like they have to over-emote with growling, and ooh and aah at every phrase.
The song "Look what you done" once again displays that style that the Stones are masters at: this very dense, busy Blues, with several instruments wailing and thrashing, pellmell. A bit like Dixieland.
They will return to this kind of delivery all throughout their career: "Whos Driving Your Plane", some Sugar Blue 78 outtakes, "Down in the Hole, "Cook Cook Blues, Fancy Man Blues.
Its totally different from sparse, fixed arrangments like "king Bee" or "Down Home Girl" or "You Gotta Move".
What is tricky with this kind of song though is that there is no room to go; arrangment and dynamics have been established and exhausted from Bar 1. Its not the kind of song where you add a new guitar at verse 2 e.g.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
liddas
Not very strong vocal delivery from Mick, lacks passion too controlled. But what a band! Maybe its the contrast between the two performances (band and vocals) that sounds strange. If Mick only let himself go a little ... (as he did on That's how strong my love is).

C

Hmm.. I can't agree with that. For me Jagger sounds fantastic, controlling brilliantly the nuances of his unique voice. It is that 'let's hold the horses a bit' which makes is even more threatening, almost aggressive. That guy can express so much even with so little effort, trusting just his own natural voice. (But if one wants to hear a really bad Jagger vocal performance, listen "I Can't Be Satisfied" from the same sessions.)

- Doxa

Agree that (also) Satisfied is bad

But in general, I have to agree with you. Jagger always approached the blues in a very original way. I think that he is one of the very few white performers that doesn't growl (correct term?) while singing the blues or otherwise try to imitate those huge voices of the great black singers. Yet, his phrasing and timing is so correct that he is always at home when singing the blues.

I admit I never truly liked his approach, until I got into Back of My Hand, and from there I revisited all his singing the blues, somehow finally appreciating its originality.

That said, if he pushed look what you've done in the Rooster area (or even the Who's Driving your plane), I would have liked it more!

C

One of their most underrated Brian-era recordings. Absolutely love it.

One of my all-time favourites

A great foot tapper

__________________________

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000

Quote
Doxa

Quote
liddas
Not very strong vocal delivery from Mick, lacks passion too controlled. But what a band! Maybe its the contrast between the two performances (band and vocals) that sounds strange. If Mick only let himself go a little ... (as he did on That's how strong my love is).

C

Hmm.. I can't agree with that. For me Jagger sounds fantastic, controlling brilliantly the nuances of his unique voice. It is that 'let's hold the horses a bit' which makes is even more threatening, almost aggressive. That guy can express so much even with so little effort, trusting just his own natural voice. (But if one wants to hear a really bad Jagger vocal performance, listen "I Can't Be Satisfied" from the same sessions.)

- Doxa

Hmm, and I cant quite agree with that. Jagger does "atisfied" much in Muddy's vocal style which isn't overloaded. I hear it as a bit of a tribute; where the singer lets the song, and the guitar shine Latter day Blues singers often feel like they have to over-emote with growling, and ooh and aah at every phrase.
The song "Look what you done" once again displays that style that the Stones are masters at: this very dense, busy Blues, with several instruments wailing and thrashing, pellmell. A bit like Dixieland.
They will return to this kind of delivery all throughout their career: "Whos Driving Your Plane", some Sugar Blue 78 outtakes, "Down in the Hole, "Cook Cook Blues, Fancy Man Blues.
Its totally different from sparse, fixed arrangments like "king Bee" or "Down Home Girl" or "You Gotta Move".
What is tricky with this kind of song though is that there is no room to go; arrangment and dynamics have been established and exhausted from Bar 1. Its not the kind of song where you add a new guitar at verse 2 e.g.

I get the point you say of Jagger's vocals in "Satisfied", but I think he sounds way too school boy-like, no balls, too polished, expresses next to nothing (and really struggles with the low notes), but that's me. I think it is among the very rare Stones tracks where Jagger actually destroys the song, which is especially unfortunate since Jones plays one of his finest slide pieces there.

But I really like your description of 'skeleton' of "Look What You've Done"! The band really sounds like a dynamic organ where everything is in its place in that little room where is not much space to move. It's THE band's total sound that fascinates me here. I think they probably better than any of their contemporaries in England got that 'holistic' feeling of Muddy Waters band right (and always had that in their sound). Here it is a like ABC model of the idea.

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-09-03 15:07 by Doxa.

Awwww, baybeeeee this is another jewel from those stunningly perfect Chess sessions where everything meshes perfectly and Brian's harmonica drenches the song in a golden magical halo of infinite sadness and mystery.

Drew

Good one

One of the reasons Brian Jones was instrumental (pun intended) launching the Rolling Stones into one of the greatest British bands ever in the early sixties. What the "Little Boy Blue" band was missing.

It's great!

Now this is what I love about the Track Talks - here's a blues performance I'd actually not heard before, and it's a cracker!

Thanks for that memory.
Hadn't heard that one in a while.
The Stones at their best!
Marv

Marv Peck

Y'all remember that rubber legged boy

Is there a CD of just Blues songs by the Stones?
Picking the best of the blues from the Brian Jones era?

Marv Peck

Y'all remember that rubber legged boy

Love this version. It has always amazed me that this skinny white kid from England could grasp something like American blues at the age of 21-22 years old his phrasing and timing are superb and as Doxa stated in his post the band was a well oiled macine at that point from 350 gigs a year. Superb track amongst many others from the Chess Sessions. I will have to listen to I Can't Be Satisfied again and just listen to the vocal because I've always liked the track especially the stereo version. Confessin' the Blues is also another one of my early favorites and I like it better than Chuck Berry's version. The Stones have always been able to play the blues better than most other white bands they just get "it".

Quote
marvpeck
Is there a CD of just Blues songs by the Stones?
Picking the best of the blues from the Brian Jones era?

How about this?
Just a compilation of the early Stones I did for a friend:

1. Road Runner
2. Honey What´s Wrong
3. Bright Lights, Big City
4. I Wanna Be Your Man
5. Stoned
6. Mona (I Need You Baby)
7. I Just Want To Make Love To You
8. Honest I Do
9. I´m A King Bee
10. Not Fade Away
11. Little By Little
12. Now I´ve Got A Witness
13. Good Times, Bad Times
14. Cops And Robbers
15. I Can´t Be Satisfied
16. Stewed And Keefed
17. Empty Heart
18. 2120 South Michigan Avenue
19. Confessin´ The Blues
20. Look What You´ve Done
21. Meet Me In The Bottom
22. Little Red Rooster
23. Everybody Needs Somebody To Love
24. Down Home Girl

1 - 5: 1963; 6 - 24: 1964

Love it, wonderful performance

One of my favourite Stones CD's is the "2120 South Michigan Avenue" which collects most if not all of the Chess Recordings; a fantastic compilation of which this track is one of the highlights

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000

Quote
Doxa

Quote
liddas
Not very strong vocal delivery from Mick, lacks passion too controlled. But what a band! Maybe its the contrast between the two performances (band and vocals) that sounds strange. If Mick only let himself go a little ... (as he did on That's how strong my love is).

C

Hmm.. I can't agree with that. For me Jagger sounds fantastic, controlling brilliantly the nuances of his unique voice. It is that 'let's hold the horses a bit' which makes is even more threatening, almost aggressive. That guy can express so much even with so little effort, trusting just his own natural voice. (But if one wants to hear a really bad Jagger vocal performance, listen "I Can't Be Satisfied" from the same sessions.)

- Doxa

Hmm, and I cant quite agree with that. Jagger does "atisfied" much in Muddy's vocal style which isn't overloaded. I hear it as a bit of a tribute; where the singer lets the song, and the guitar shine Latter day Blues singers often feel like they have to over-emote with growling, and ooh and aah at every phrase.
The song "Look what you done" once again displays that style that the Stones are masters at: this very dense, busy Blues, with several instruments wailing and thrashing, pellmell. A bit like Dixieland.
They will return to this kind of delivery all throughout their career: "Whos Driving Your Plane", some Sugar Blue 78 outtakes, "Down in the Hole, "Cook Cook Blues, Fancy Man Blues.
Its totally different from sparse, fixed arrangments like "king Bee" or "Down Home Girl" or "You Gotta Move".
What is tricky with this kind of song though is that there is no room to go; arrangment and dynamics have been established and exhausted from Bar 1. Its not the kind of song where you add a new guitar at verse 2 e.g.

I get the point you say of Jagger's vocals in "Satisfied", but I think he sounds way too school boy-like, no balls, too polished, expresses next to nothing (and really struggles with the low notes), but that's me. I think it is among the very rare Stones tracks where Jagger actually destroys the song, which is especially unfortunate since Jones plays one of his finest slide pieces there.

But I really like your description of 'skeleton' of "Look What You've Done"! The band really sounds like a dynamic organ where everything is in its place in that little room where is not much space to move. It's THE band's total sound that fascinates me here. I think they probably better than any of their contemporaries in England got that 'holistic' feeling of Muddy Waters band right (and always had that in their sound). Here it is a like ABC model of the idea.

- Doxa

If we're being that harsh, the same could be said about That's How Strong My Love Is.

However, in all it's youthfulness, I really like Satisfied, as well as LWYD and THSMLI.

It's an underrated cover by the Stones', but so is "I Can't Be Satisfied". I think Mick's vocals are fine.

The band was on fire during that first session at Chess.

Rob