Tell Me :
Talk
I know
I think that was a surprise for a lot of people.
I know this is an older thread, but I just came across it.
*I listened very close and maybe you guys are right! At first I was thinking it was Taylor on the right, but I hear a few Richards licks in there during the verses.
PS, If anybody ever wants to hear what Taylor would have done with a lead on Bitch, seek out Herbie Mann's London Underground. Some red hot blues licks on that version.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2014-08-26 08:26 by TravelinMan.
It is Keith. Taylor plays something similar in Philly, but it's evident that it's not the same. The chords are not exactly the same - what Taylor plays live is more advanced and with more chord patterns. Clearly inspired by what Keith wrote, though, but more developed.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2014-09-23 10:44 by DandelionPowderman.
Or maybe their parts get replaced or wiped. Music is an on-going process...
Taylor is credited on the studio version of BS. He also said he is on it, but can you hear him?
My point is, sometimes it's not as easy as you describe here - and some parts aren't as essential in the soundscape as others...
Yeah, he's down there somewhere - under Keith and Bobby
Nice version, but not with the intensity and nerve of this version, imo.
In Essen he's on top to me, the entire band actually.
I think the second version is too sloppy, the guitar solo quite appalling, but in the end it's all about taste.
Yeah, they would never play it so close to the studio version as they did it at Altamont. But that it was so close to it is very natural: they had just recorded it a few days earlier, so they surely didn't have time to devolop any 'road versions' yet.. Quite the contrary, the band sounds like doing its best to keep teh song in shape, and a bit nervous if it it will go right... But they do get the groove right... They sound like breathing the studio version.
I guess after Altamont they would never find the 'original' Muscle Shoals feel again, probably even if they had tried. For example, if we compare it to the Essen version of Europe 1970, the song seemingly had started to shapen into new, more hard rocking direction (and the development would continue especially during 1972 and 1973 tours). Which is natural for a living and breathing band... I think the "birthday version" from 1970 (with Clapton and everything) also lacks that special feel the MUscle Shoals original has, and I can understand why they preferred the latter. They captured something unique there, the band being well-oiled from playing live, but still damn fresh. The time and place was just right.
It must be frustrating for them to wait some year and a half - due to whatever hassles with record deals and everything - to get this gem released. I am sure they did know the very minute they first recorded it, or even earlier (thinking the clip of Mick playing it to Ike and Tina), that they had a special song there.
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2014-09-26 11:19 by Doxa.
Compared to BEGGARS BANQUET and LET IT BLEED material, much of them being 'studio experiments', "Brown Sugar" never needed such a new clothing, when transformed to play live. The sound they created there, based on already tested live sound and experience, was ready to go live. So it didn't needed to be much transformed or arranged differently to suit to their current live capacities. So the talk of different versions is a bit far-reaching, I agree with that. I think for most of non-Stones nerds, the band has always played the song about the same... But for the experts, those little differences in nuances are damn meaningful, especially the differences in the groove laid by Richards/Watts/Wyman.... Plus the people who see the differences only in what Taylor does...
- Doxa
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2014-09-26 14:24 by Doxa.
That's true, but it is mostly down to Keith (in particular) and Charlie how to make this one fly, imo. For me, it's not that important if it's a guitar or a sax playing a great solo on it, as long as it's great. Keith's solo from Altamont isn't great, but it has that Muscle Shoals-feel to it. I like that
Bill Janovitz reports in Rocks Off that the vocal we hear on Happy was recorded in France and the backing vocals were added in Los Angeles.
I like the Essen'70 tempo, it launches Taylor very well, just like GS, Philly'72. But indeed, the original slower studio versions give it a different rock feel, more danceable or something like that.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
elunsi
()
Date: January 23, 2014 13:58
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
elunsiQuote
Mathijs
They simply acknowledge the fact that without the input of the other, albeit 5% or 50%, the end result is not Rolling Stones music.
Take Happy: the music is recorded at Nellcote, but the lyrics where written by Jagger and Richards in LA, and Jagger had a great deal of input in producing (vocals, backup vocals), mixing and mastering the track. And we don't know who wrote the riff, or the melody, or the breaks exactly. It could have been something Jagger was playing over and over out of boredom....
Mathijs
Interesting...
Usually everyone says that Mick had zero to do with it.
Mick himself said "we wrote the words..."
I know
I think that was a surprise for a lot of people.
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: January 23, 2014 14:02
It doesn't have to mean anything other than "we", meaning the band - aka Keith, in this case. Could very well be that they both wrote the words, of course - although the lyrics sound very Keith-ish
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
TravelinMan
()
Date: August 26, 2014 08:19
Quote
MathijsQuote
straycatblues73Quote
Mathijs
Tremelo picked as in arpeggio indeed. PLaying the chord note by note instead of as one chord. Live taylor's part resembled the part he plays on this outtake, I guess it is the original take from Muscle Shoals, which in the end was dropped completely.
.
Mathijs
surely that's two keith tracks with a dubbed taylor solo ?
I actually think you're right. It's an overdubbed open G part by Keith, it's not a Taylor overdub. That high pitched first chord on the Eflat is that chord that I think is typical for Taylor. What a mess the recording of this track is!
Mathijs
I know this is an older thread, but I just came across it.
*I listened very close and maybe you guys are right! At first I was thinking it was Taylor on the right, but I hear a few Richards licks in there during the verses.
PS, If anybody ever wants to hear what Taylor would have done with a lead on Bitch, seek out Herbie Mann's London Underground. Some red hot blues licks on that version.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2014-08-26 08:26 by TravelinMan.
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
sonomastone
()
Date: August 28, 2014 10:53
regarding the long debate in this thread about songwriting credits - it is silly. jagger/richards had the same agreement lennon/mccartney did - they both got credit for any song written by either of them. very smart move to make sure there was all the incentive in the world to collaborate and help one another.
it was a smart business arrangement and it's pointless to argue with or about.
in a situation like this, the only way to be sure who wrote what is when both richards and jagger make the same claim.
it was a smart business arrangement and it's pointless to argue with or about.
in a situation like this, the only way to be sure who wrote what is when both richards and jagger make the same claim.
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
TravelinMan
()
Date: September 23, 2014 01:11
Just listened to Brown Sugar from Philly in '72 and Taylor opens with the same parts from Muscle Shoals, so I am convinced he did write/play those parts on the early version. To paraphrase Keith what said: "Ronnie can play like me, but I can't play like him." Pretty sure the same goes with Taylor.
Before people bash me as a "Taylorite"...I am a big fan of ALL the guitarists that the Stones ever had!
Before people bash me as a "Taylorite"...I am a big fan of ALL the guitarists that the Stones ever had!
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: September 23, 2014 10:12
Quote
TravelinMan
Just listened to Brown Sugar from Philly in '72 and Taylor opens with the same parts from Muscle Shoals, so I am convinced he did write/play those parts on the early version. To paraphrase Keith what said: "Ronnie can play like me, but I can't play like him." Pretty sure the same goes with Taylor.
Before people bash me as a "Taylorite"...I am a big fan of ALL the guitarists that the Stones ever had!
It is Keith. Taylor plays something similar in Philly, but it's evident that it's not the same. The chords are not exactly the same - what Taylor plays live is more advanced and with more chord patterns. Clearly inspired by what Keith wrote, though, but more developed.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2014-09-23 10:44 by DandelionPowderman.
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
TravelinMan
()
Date: September 24, 2014 02:18
Suppose you're right. I don't understand how these guys forget what they played on. Or maybe they don't actually listen to their own records!
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: September 24, 2014 12:50
Quote
TravelinMan
Suppose you're right. I don't understand how these guys forget what they played on. Or maybe they don't actually listen to their own records!
Or maybe their parts get replaced or wiped. Music is an on-going process...
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
TravelinMan
()
Date: September 25, 2014 04:04
Right, I understand that. I can tell if my part gets wiped from a record though.
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: September 25, 2014 11:49
Quote
TravelinMan
Right, I understand that. I can tell if my part gets wiped from a record though.
Taylor is credited on the studio version of BS. He also said he is on it, but can you hear him?
My point is, sometimes it's not as easy as you describe here - and some parts aren't as essential in the soundscape as others...
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
LuxuryStones
()
Date: September 25, 2014 14:39
Fortunately we got the live tapes. Essen 1970 speaks volumes, best version ever imo with a soaring Taylor solo.
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: September 25, 2014 14:56
Quote
LuxuryStones
Fortunately we got the live tapes. Essen 1970 speaks volumes, best version ever imo with a soaring Taylor solo.
Yeah, he's down there somewhere - under Keith and Bobby
Nice version, but not with the intensity and nerve of this version, imo.
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
LuxuryStones
()
Date: September 25, 2014 16:08
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LuxuryStones
Fortunately we got the live tapes. Essen 1970 speaks volumes, best version ever imo with a soaring Taylor solo.
Yeah, he's down there somewhere - under Keith and Bobby
Nice version, but not with the intensity and nerve of this version, imo.
In Essen he's on top to me, the entire band actually.
I think the second version is too sloppy, the guitar solo quite appalling, but in the end it's all about taste.
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: September 25, 2014 16:31
Surely you mean "appealing"?
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
LuxuryStones
()
Date: September 25, 2014 16:58
No.
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: September 26, 2014 10:24
I wasn't thinking about the solo regarding this BS version, merely the feel of the song, which is more like the brutal rocking studio version than other faster live versions. The live versions tend to lose something along the way, imo.
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: September 26, 2014 11:15
Quote
DandelionPowderman
I wasn't thinking about the solo regarding this BS version, merely the feel of the song, which is more like the brutal rocking studio version than other faster live versions. The live versions tend to lose something along the way, imo.
Yeah, they would never play it so close to the studio version as they did it at Altamont. But that it was so close to it is very natural: they had just recorded it a few days earlier, so they surely didn't have time to devolop any 'road versions' yet.. Quite the contrary, the band sounds like doing its best to keep teh song in shape, and a bit nervous if it it will go right... But they do get the groove right... They sound like breathing the studio version.
I guess after Altamont they would never find the 'original' Muscle Shoals feel again, probably even if they had tried. For example, if we compare it to the Essen version of Europe 1970, the song seemingly had started to shapen into new, more hard rocking direction (and the development would continue especially during 1972 and 1973 tours). Which is natural for a living and breathing band... I think the "birthday version" from 1970 (with Clapton and everything) also lacks that special feel the MUscle Shoals original has, and I can understand why they preferred the latter. They captured something unique there, the band being well-oiled from playing live, but still damn fresh. The time and place was just right.
It must be frustrating for them to wait some year and a half - due to whatever hassles with record deals and everything - to get this gem released. I am sure they did know the very minute they first recorded it, or even earlier (thinking the clip of Mick playing it to Ike and Tina), that they had a special song there.
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2014-09-26 11:19 by Doxa.
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: September 26, 2014 11:46
A trivia question - for which I don't have an answer: they recorded "Brown Sugar" 2-4 of December, and performed it to 300 000 hippies at 6th. Have they ever played a song in front of a live audience so quickly after having recorded it? Probably during some early years, when they divided their time to studio and playing shows every night, but I guess "Brown Sugar" is a rather unique piece. Maybe some Hyde Park LET IT BLEED numbers, plus "Loving Cup" and "Honky Tonk Women", are quite close. "Dead Flowers" during 1970 tour? Mostly during the 70's and since then the albums they were touring behind were recorded at least half a year earlier (I mean the basic tracks, not some over-dubs and mixes).
- Doxa
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-09-26 11:47 by Doxa.
- Doxa
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-09-26 11:47 by Doxa.
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: September 26, 2014 12:53
They weren't even finished recording Oh No Not You Again when they performed it at Julliard, according to timeisonourside.com (finished in june - performed May 10).
About BS, the live versions aren't that different, but the groove is. That was my point. In one way it can be natural to speed up a number on stage - on the other hand, sometimes not
About BS, the live versions aren't that different, but the groove is. That was my point. In one way it can be natural to speed up a number on stage - on the other hand, sometimes not
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
marcovandereijk
()
Date: September 26, 2014 13:02
Worried about you was first recorded in the studio in 1975, I think, but the published
version from Tattoo You is from 1981. In between those years they played it on stage
at the El Mocambo gigs in 1977.
Just as long as the guitar plays, let it steal your heart away
version from Tattoo You is from 1981. In between those years they played it on stage
at the El Mocambo gigs in 1977.
Just as long as the guitar plays, let it steal your heart away
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: September 26, 2014 14:18
Quote
DandelionPowderman
About BS, the live versions aren't that different, but the groove is. That was my point. In one way it can be natural to speed up a number on stage - on the other hand, sometimes not
Compared to BEGGARS BANQUET and LET IT BLEED material, much of them being 'studio experiments', "Brown Sugar" never needed such a new clothing, when transformed to play live. The sound they created there, based on already tested live sound and experience, was ready to go live. So it didn't needed to be much transformed or arranged differently to suit to their current live capacities. So the talk of different versions is a bit far-reaching, I agree with that. I think for most of non-Stones nerds, the band has always played the song about the same... But for the experts, those little differences in nuances are damn meaningful, especially the differences in the groove laid by Richards/Watts/Wyman.... Plus the people who see the differences only in what Taylor does...
- Doxa
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2014-09-26 14:24 by Doxa.
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: September 26, 2014 16:18
Quote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowderman
About BS, the live versions aren't that different, but the groove is. That was my point. In one way it can be natural to speed up a number on stage - on the other hand, sometimes not
Compared to BEGGARS BANQUET and LET IT BLEED material, much of them being 'studio experiments', "Brown Sugar" never needed such a new clothing, when transformed to play live. The sound they created there, based on already tested live sound and experience, was ready to go live. So it didn't needed to be much transformed or arranged differently to suit to their current live capacities. So the talk of different versions is a bit far-reaching, I agree with that. I think for most of non-Stones nerds, the band has always played the song about the same... But for the experts, those little differences in nuances are damn meaningful, especially the differences in the groove laid by Richards/Watts/Wyman.... Plus the people who see the differences only in what Taylor does...
- Doxa
That's true, but it is mostly down to Keith (in particular) and Charlie how to make this one fly, imo. For me, it's not that important if it's a guitar or a sax playing a great solo on it, as long as it's great. Keith's solo from Altamont isn't great, but it has that Muscle Shoals-feel to it. I like that
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: September 26, 2014 16:41
Quote
elunsiQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
elunsiQuote
Mathijs
They simply acknowledge the fact that without the input of the other, albeit 5% or 50%, the end result is not Rolling Stones music.
Take Happy: the music is recorded at Nellcote, but the lyrics where written by Jagger and Richards in LA, and Jagger had a great deal of input in producing (vocals, backup vocals), mixing and mastering the track. And we don't know who wrote the riff, or the melody, or the breaks exactly. It could have been something Jagger was playing over and over out of boredom....
Mathijs
Interesting...
Usually everyone says that Mick had zero to do with it.
Mick himself said "we wrote the words..."
I know
I think that was a surprise for a lot of people.
Bill Janovitz reports in Rocks Off that the vocal we hear on Happy was recorded in France and the backing vocals were added in Los Angeles.
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
LuxuryStones
()
Date: September 26, 2014 23:22
Quote
DandelionPowderman
I wasn't thinking about the solo regarding this BS version, merely the feel of the song, which is more like the brutal rocking studio version than other faster live versions. The live versions tend to lose something along the way, imo.
I like the Essen'70 tempo, it launches Taylor very well, just like GS, Philly'72. But indeed, the original slower studio versions give it a different rock feel, more danceable or something like that.
Re: Mick Taylor - Sticky Fingers guitar contributions
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: September 26, 2014 23:52
Quote
MathijsQuote
FP
Any idea who plays what on Brown Sugar?
Richards plays all guitars. Taylor's original part as can be heard on the outtakes, have been removed completely for the released track. What you hear is about five Keith parts. Left is the original open G track from Muscle Shoals, right is a rhtyhm track by Richards that is composed from three or 4 tracks. There's 2 guitars doing little one-string runs, a stanard tuned guitar doing a Berry-like rhythm, and during the verses (woo!) there's an overdub of an open G tuned guitar. And Richards does the acoustic. But basically, Taylor doesn't play on the released version of BS.
Live in 1972 and 1973 Taylor would play very close to his original rhythm track, which is a tremelo picked guitar.
This sounds interesting but how exactly are you concluding this stuff? Is this your educated opinion based on analysis of the outtakes? peace
There's about 6 or 7 outtakes of BS, and it is very interesting to hear how the production continued, with Richards first taking bits out of Taylor's track and overdubbing onto it, then replacing it altogether. Version III even has an overdubbed solo that sounds like Taylor, later removed again.
Mathijs
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
abbiatti , BeastyBurdeny , cyclist , daspyknows , DGA35 , dishevelmentblues , esqcjh , georgelicks , gtx8834 , harald2002 , hockenheim95 , Icetraders , JivinSisterFanny , KeithNacho , kovach , Kuntaman , Marhsall , njbjae , RaahenTiikeri , RollstoDRSC , Shotaway2 , spidey39 , StonyRoad , tommyturbo76 , TW2019 , waterrats
Guests:
1765
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10