Quote
Gemini

Quote
71Tele
I found John's book quite odd. Apart from a few obvious factual errors, he decides to pick on Mick Taylor, of all people. He says it is not for him to say what happened at the Let It Be sessions (really? Why bother with the book then? Is he afraid The Beatles won't ask him to produce their next album?), but relates an incident where Taylor allegedly overdubbed drums on a Stones song? Which one please? Also, while I agree with his assessment of Spector's LIB album, I have heard Glyn John's version, and The Beatles were right - it was unreleasable.

Strange too because he's talked about LIB sessions in interviews.

There were no Let It Be sessions, but there were Get Back sessions.

The unreleased 1969 album that Glyn Johns mixed twice but was vetoed by the band was called Get Back (with Don't Let Me Down and 9 other songs).

The idea behind this, as the cover shows, was to get back to where they once belonged, so they retook the cover from their first album and also like their first album named it after the first single, which was released, along with a subtitle naming one other song released (the B-side of Get Back) along with the number of "other" songs on the album.

There were no Get Back sessions as such either then.

Alright, fair enough. But there were sessions for an album that came to be named Get Back long before these became famous for what the film came to be called.

Quote
stonehearted

Quote
Gemini

Quote
71Tele
I found John's book quite odd. Apart from a few obvious factual errors, he decides to pick on Mick Taylor, of all people. He says it is not for him to say what happened at the Let It Be sessions (really? Why bother with the book then? Is he afraid The Beatles won't ask him to produce their next album?), but relates an incident where Taylor allegedly overdubbed drums on a Stones song? Which one please? Also, while I agree with his assessment of Spector's LIB album, I have heard Glyn John's version, and The Beatles were right - it was unreleasable.

Strange too because he's talked about LIB sessions in interviews.

There were no Let It Be sessions, but there were Get Back sessions.

The unreleased 1969 album that Glyn Johns mixed twice but was vetoed by the band was called Get Back (with Don't Let Me Down and 9 other songs).

The idea behind this, as the cover shows, was to get back to where they once belonged, so they retook the cover from their first album and also like their first album named it after the first single, which was released, along with a subtitle naming one other song released (the B-side of Get Back) along with the number of "other" songs on the album.

get the let it be album that is stripped of the phil spector wall of sound production . much more enjoyable without all the string arrangments on every song .



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-03-05 13:32 by TheGreek.

Quote
stonehearted
Alright, fair enough. But there were sessions for an album that came to be named Get Back long before these became famous for what the film came to be called.

The end product of the sessions was the Let It Be album, makes sense to call it Let It Be sessions.

This is ridiculous. Like Mick would choose an engineer, however gifted, over his lead guitarist.

Quote
stonehearted

Quote
Gemini

Quote
71Tele
I found John's book quite odd. Apart from a few obvious factual errors, he decides to pick on Mick Taylor, of all people. He says it is not for him to say what happened at the Let It Be sessions (really? Why bother with the book then? Is he afraid The Beatles won't ask him to produce their next album?), but relates an incident where Taylor allegedly overdubbed drums on a Stones song? Which one please? Also, while I agree with his assessment of Spector's LIB album, I have heard Glyn John's version, and The Beatles were right - it was unreleasable.

Strange too because he's talked about LIB sessions in interviews.

There were no Let It Be sessions, but there were Get Back sessions.

The unreleased 1969 album that Glyn Johns mixed twice but was vetoed by the band was called Get Back (with Don't Let Me Down and 9 other songs).

The idea behind this, as the cover shows, was to get back to where they once belonged, so they retook the cover from their first album and also like their first album named it after the first single, which was released, along with a subtitle naming one other song released (the B-side of Get Back) along with the number of "other" songs on the album.

That's a nice little bootleg collection, but I still prefer the Phil Spector version.

Quote
DiamondDog7

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
DiamondDog7

Quote
liddas

Quote
Roadster32
Can anyone post the whole article?

[www.mojo4music.com]

Did someone read the full article?

C

Nope. But I've read that part of the book at the bookstore. You can see that Glyn wasn't that fond of Mick Taylor. Especially after Exile on Main Street. Glyn said that Taylor's personality changed a lot because of the drugs. He was like a spoiled kid and tough one to work with.
Glyn was also glad that Taylor left the Stones. He wasn't that keen on him. But around 1984 he've met Taylor again and he was clean during that time and Glyn did liked him again.

But again, I didn't read the article. Just the chapters in the book.

And the rest of the band weren't?

It's weird that a supposed fair and straight guy like Glyn really is writing this stuff - it baffles me a bit, since I haven't heard this about Taylor elsewhere...

It wasn't about the drugs and the whole band here. It was about Taylor who've changed a lot after the Exile sessions because of the drugs. According to Glyn MT was a very nice and quiet when he joined the Stones in 1969. But after the Exile sessions his ego grew. That's why Glyn tried to explain the whole thing about MT playing all kinds of instruments + vocals and recording this whole thing. MT was pushing his ideas through on an irritating level that Glyn lost his mind on this. He erased the recordings and overdubs. MT left the studio very angry about this...

I read Glyn's book too. Good book. Many good details. Speaking as a huge MT fan, I don't think that Glyn was all that hard on him. The incident in the Exile overdub session was a low moment to be sure, but it's bookended with stories about good incidents Taylor.

Just one detail about the story worth noting: Charlie and Bill had already recorded their parts. MT took it upon himself to record what he thought were better versions - all on the same multitrack. Glyn didn't want to use MT's version (his reasoning: the Stones already have the best rhythm section in the world - why would you think of not using it), and Taylor reacted very negatively.

My analysis (which is worth absolutely nothing): MT was at a point where he was trying assert himself more as a creative force in the band. When there's pre-existing structure, you're going to rub up against it. The interactions can be difficult.

This incident does give some insight as to why Taylor left the band - his creative ambitions were thwarted somewhat, and he looked to fulfill them somewhere else.

-R

Quote
Mathijs

Keith's solo? That's Taylor.

Mathijs

Well, I can't wait 'til this gets resolved. I had always assumed Taylor as well, so never considered it. It does sound like Keith's style of solo. The bending style especially, but also the lack of vibrato that someone mentioned. It isn't fluid like a Taylor solo. If Taylor played it, he was making a concious effort to play it like Keith would play it. Which may be easy for some, but not so sure about MT.

Would be kind of funny if the song he overdubbed on was Separately or Leather Jacket.

Quote
stonehearted

Quote
Gemini

Quote
71Tele
I found John's book quite odd. Apart from a few obvious factual errors, he decides to pick on Mick Taylor, of all people. He says it is not for him to say what happened at the Let It Be sessions (really? Why bother with the book then? Is he afraid The Beatles won't ask him to produce their next album?), but relates an incident where Taylor allegedly overdubbed drums on a Stones song? Which one please? Also, while I agree with his assessment of Spector's LIB album, I have heard Glyn John's version, and The Beatles were right - it was unreleasable.

Strange too because he's talked about LIB sessions in interviews.

There were no Let It Be sessions, but there were Get Back sessions.

The unreleased 1969 album that Glyn Johns mixed twice but was vetoed by the band was called Get Back (with Don't Let Me Down and 9 other songs).

The idea behind this, as the cover shows, was to get back to where they once belonged, so they retook the cover from their first album and also like their first album named it after the first single, which was released, along with a subtitle naming one other song released (the B-side of Get Back) along with the number of "other" songs on the album.

Yes, knew all of that.

Quote
71Tele
I found John's book quite odd. Apart from a few obvious factual errors, he decides to pick on Mick Taylor, of all people. He says it is not for him to say what happened at the Let It Be sessions (really? Why bother with the book then? Is he afraid The Beatles won't ask him to produce their next album?), but relates an incident where Taylor allegedly overdubbed drums on a Stones song? Which one please? Also, while I agree with his assessment of Spector's LIB album, I have heard Glyn John's version, and The Beatles were right - it was unreleasable.

Count me among the disappointed. Johns' disjointed allegations aside, his lack of candor is more problematic. That anything Mick Taylor recorded, be it guitar, drums, bass, keyboards, percussion, violin, viola and cello (Paul Buckmaster has never told us who comprised the string section on Moonlight Mile) would outstrip the endeavors of the remaining four band member's; average musicians at best; Johns' failure to address Mick Taylor's vocal contribution on Gimme Shelter border's on journalistic criminalism.

Rather than crediting, finally, the originator of perhaps the most seminal backing vocal in the history of rock music, Johns opts for the easy way out, thus keeping alive the myth that it was Merry Clayton rather than Mick Tayor who sang on Gimme Shelter.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-03-05 21:49 by TonyMo.

Quote
TonyMo

Quote
71Tele
I found John's book quite odd. Apart from a few obvious factual errors, he decides to pick on Mick Taylor, of all people. He says it is not for him to say what happened at the Let It Be sessions (really? Why bother with the book then? Is he afraid The Beatles won't ask him to produce their next album?), but relates an incident where Taylor allegedly overdubbed drums on a Stones song? Which one please? Also, while I agree with his assessment of Spector's LIB album, I have heard Glyn John's version, and The Beatles were right - it was unreleasable.

Count me among the disappointed. Johns' disjointed allegations aside, his lack of candor is more problematic. That anything Mick Taylor recorded, be it guitar, drums, bass, keyboards, percussion, violin, viola and cello (Paul Buckmaster has never told us who comprised the string section on Moonlight Mile) would outstrip the endeavors of the remaining four band member's; average musicians at best; Johns' failure to address Mick Taylor's vocal contribution on Gimme Shelter border's on journalistic criminalism.

Rather than crediting, finally, the originator of perhaps the most seminal backing vocal in the history of rock music, Johns opts for the easy way out, thus keeping alive the myth that it was Merry Clayton rather than Mick Tayor who sang on Gimme Shelter.

Am I mistaken in believing that Mick Jagger also believes that it was Merry singing on "Gimme Shelter" as well? Who told you it was Mick Taylor? I've never heard this from anyone anywhere before.

Peace,
Mr DJA

That guy can't stand to give Taylor any credit so he writes unfunny satirical posts.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-03-06 04:54 by TravelinMan.

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
LuxuryStones

Quote
TravelinMan

Quote
DandelionPowderman

AND: TWFNO is not one of "those" songs, as Keith both played on it, sang on it, soloed on it (albeit short), played guitar synth on it (!) and wrote it with Mick. Taylor coloured it more than nicely.

The official liner notes have only Taylor and Wyman playing a synthesizer. Oh, what song did Taylor play congas on, FF? Can't think of it off the top of my head.

That's right. Taylor created a similar sound on his '79 solo album.
The info about Taylor playing the Hi-Fly guitar synth is coming from time is on our side.com. Don't know if it is correct.

They are both playing it on TWFNO. Listen to the ending of Keith's solo here:

Keith's solo? That's Taylor.

Mathijs

I listened to this a few times and although I'd love to believe it's Keith the sound matches too closely to Taylor's famed outro, but still I'd love to be convinced it's Keith.. Nonetheless it's a lovely part. So many people play double stops but not like this. Superb, the effect is likely just an Eventide flange. Popular at the time but the guitarist's touch and Glyn John's subtle mix...... All the crab we write about a guy like that, then we listen to his work. I hang my head in shame book or not. Guys like the John's brothers they assembled all this great music amid chaos and politics beyond our imagination. All is forgiven after playing one side of IORR...

The sound is pure Ampeg, staccato Keith, even though the notes are not typical of him during this era. Taylor would have bended the notes Keith slided here, don't you think? The two other electric tracks have a somewhat softer strat sound.

I thought it was Taylor for 25 years. By listening closer I'm convinced it's Keith.

Quote
nightskyman

Quote
stonehearted

Quote
Gemini

Quote
71Tele
I found John's book quite odd. Apart from a few obvious factual errors, he decides to pick on Mick Taylor, of all people. He says it is not for him to say what happened at the Let It Be sessions (really? Why bother with the book then? Is he afraid The Beatles won't ask him to produce their next album?), but relates an incident where Taylor allegedly overdubbed drums on a Stones song? Which one please? Also, while I agree with his assessment of Spector's LIB album, I have heard Glyn John's version, and The Beatles were right - it was unreleasable.

Strange too because he's talked about LIB sessions in interviews.

There were no Let It Be sessions, but there were Get Back sessions.

The unreleased 1969 album that Glyn Johns mixed twice but was vetoed by the band was called Get Back (with Don't Let Me Down and 9 other songs).

The idea behind this, as the cover shows, was to get back to where they once belonged, so they retook the cover from their first album and also like their first album named it after the first single, which was released, along with a subtitle naming one other song released (the B-side of Get Back) along with the number of "other" songs on the album.

That's a nice little bootleg collection, but I still prefer the Phil Spector version.

I believe some advance copies of the Get Back album circulated to radio stations. Obviously cover art was done. Strangely, Let It Be, Naked is neither Let It Be nor the original Get Back album, but rather seems to be mainly Paul McCartney's revenge against Spector. Also, John's bum bass notes on Long And Winding Road were somehow magically corrected.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
The sound is pure Ampeg, staccato Keith, even though the notes are not typical of him during this era. Taylor would have bended the notes Keith slided here, don't you think? The two other electric tracks have a somewhat softer strat sound.

I thought it was Taylor for 25 years. By listening closer I'm convinced it's Keith.

I think I'll listen to the entire album a couple of times over the weekend. See if I can find a tone that matches up from another spot. We could have asked Glyn Johns before we spent four pages insulting him. He would know. I listened again, it does sound like it could be on "Some Girls", I know it's not Ronnie so maybe you're right..



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-03-06 10:07 by DoomandGloom.

Quote
DoomandGloom

Quote
DandelionPowderman
The sound is pure Ampeg, staccato Keith, even though the notes are not typical of him during this era. Taylor would have bended the notes Keith slided here, don't you think? The two other electric tracks have a somewhat softer strat sound.

I thought it was Taylor for 25 years. By listening closer I'm convinced it's Keith.

I think I'll listen to the entire album a couple of times over the weekend. See if I can find a tone that matches up from another spot. We could have asked Glyn Johns before we spent four pages insulting him. He would know. I listened again, it does sound like it could be on "Some Girls", I know it's not Ronnie so maybe you're right..

Listen to what's going on at 0:07. If Taylor had played that he would a) played it more fluently or b) bended the g-string.

I bought the mag and what stuck me is the "no BS allowed here" side of Glyn Johns which I find hugely enjoyable :

yes he wrongly believes that M. Hunter wss killed durind SFTD at Altamont but apart from this, his recollections are clear-minded and deprived of any egomaniac aspects.

He lauds Jagger as much as he can for being the driving force behind the band. Always "clean" in the studio, always pro, always giving it 100% take after take. By this GJ implies that Jagger was the boss and if the band had been driven by Keef it would have fallen by the wayside in 70 or 71.
Things heven't changed much, haven't they? ><

Yeah Johns kicked Taylor in the arse and pushed him back in his corner with his "you're just a lead guitarist in this band" verbal punch. But you had to be totally stupid to track bass and drums when you're co-working with Watts and Wyman.

Plus he loves Hopkins... that's why he doesn't have a single word for Preston?

Overall, if you read between the line you realize that after Nellcote, Jagger wanted Johns to be back cause he was the only one in the Stones entourage who wasn't on DST ("dealer standard time") : Miller Andy Johns and Keef were addicts so the band worked very slowly.
Was Jagger trying to move the balance of power within the Stones camp back to the non-users side (Jagger Wyman Watts) and kick the band back in motion?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-03-06 15:30 by dcba.

Quote
TravelinMan
That guy can't stand to give Taylor any credit so he writes unfunny satirical posts.

Thanks TravelinMan. I kinda thought that was most likely a poor attempt at humor. Hate to admit that I took the bait.

Peace,
Mr DJA

Quote
TravelinMan
That guy can't stand to give Taylor any credit so he writes unfunny satirical posts.

I dunno, I find his posts funny and I'm exactly the sort of fanatical Taylorite he's riffing on

Quote
TonyMo

Quote
71Tele
I found John's book quite odd. Apart from a few obvious factual errors, he decides to pick on Mick Taylor, of all people. He says it is not for him to say what happened at the Let It Be sessions (really? Why bother with the book then? Is he afraid The Beatles won't ask him to produce their next album?), but relates an incident where Taylor allegedly overdubbed drums on a Stones song? Which one please? Also, while I agree with his assessment of Spector's LIB album, I have heard Glyn John's version, and The Beatles were right - it was unreleasable.

Count me among the disappointed. Johns' disjointed allegations aside, his lack of candor is more problematic. That anything Mick Taylor recorded, be it guitar, drums, bass, keyboards, percussion, violin, viola and cello (Paul Buckmaster has never told us who comprised the string section on Moonlight Mile) would outstrip the endeavors of the remaining four band member's; average musicians at best; Johns' failure to address Mick Taylor's vocal contribution on Gimme Shelter border's on journalistic criminalism.

Rather than crediting, finally, the originator of perhaps the most seminal backing vocal in the history of rock music, Johns opts for the easy way out, thus keeping alive the myth that it was Merry Clayton rather than Mick Tayor who sang on Gimme Shelter.

Great sarcasm, but as you were responding to my post it doesn't look like you quite understood it. I was not saying Taylor was right to overdub parts other band members would normally play, nor do I think they would have been better, so your hyperbole about Gimme Shelter is misplaced. I was merely mystified about why Johns included this incident and why he didn't name the song in question.

Quote
DoomandGloom

Quote
DandelionPowderman
The sound is pure Ampeg, staccato Keith, even though the notes are not typical of him during this era. Taylor would have bended the notes Keith slided here, don't you think? The two other electric tracks have a somewhat softer strat sound.

I thought it was Taylor for 25 years. By listening closer I'm convinced it's Keith.

I think I'll listen to the entire album a couple of times over the weekend. See if I can find a tone that matches up from another spot. We could have asked Glyn Johns before we spent four pages insulting him. He would know. I listened again, it does sound like it could be on "Some Girls", I know it's not Ronnie so maybe you're right..

I think it's Keith after listening a few time, later in the song Keithisms appear again, similar to JMI... The real selling point is that this beautiful part is in the intro and Keith, he's the master of intros. There's a old music store I know that has a pair of plexi Ampeg re-issues, he wants close to a grand a piece. I'm very tempted but they've hung in his store for so long I fear they won't play well... With the short scale it might be the perfect open-g guitar.

Quote
Stoneburst

Quote
TravelinMan
That guy can't stand to give Taylor any credit so he writes unfunny satirical posts.

I dunno, I find his posts funny and I'm exactly the sort of fanatical Taylorite he's riffing on

Yeah, I thought it was funny the first and maybe second time.

Quote
DoomandGloom

Quote
DoomandGloom

Quote
DandelionPowderman
The sound is pure Ampeg, staccato Keith, even though the notes are not typical of him during this era. Taylor would have bended the notes Keith slided here, don't you think? The two other electric tracks have a somewhat softer strat sound.

I thought it was Taylor for 25 years. By listening closer I'm convinced it's Keith.

I think I'll listen to the entire album a couple of times over the weekend. See if I can find a tone that matches up from another spot. We could have asked Glyn Johns before we spent four pages insulting him. He would know. I listened again, it does sound like it could be on "Some Girls", I know it's not Ronnie so maybe you're right..

I think it's Keith after listening a few time, later in the song Keithisms appear again, similar to JMI... The real selling point is that this beautiful part is in the intro and Keith, he's the master of intros. There's a old music store I know that has a pair of plexi Ampeg re-issues, he wants close to a grand a piece. I'm very tempted but they've hung in his store for so long I fear they won't play well... With the short scale it might be the perfect open-g guitar.

I always assumed it was Taylor, but now I believe it to be Richards. I think Jagger took his melody rather than Richards playing this after the fact. Richards even said that he had the riff and the band took it somewhere else.

Timeisonourside has Wyman listed as the synth player, when in fact it is Taylor. Wyman played synth on Fingerprint File.

Quote
dcba
Yeah Johns kicked Taylor in the arse and pushed him back in his corner with his "you're just a lead guitarist in this band" verbal punch. But you had to be totally stupid to track bass and drums when you're co-working with Watts and Wyman.

Plus he loves Hopkins... that's why he doesn't have a single word for Preston?

To be fair, Richards, Taylor, and Wood are all talented and unique bass players and sometimes what they play is what a song calls for. Drums, yeah...no need unless you're Jimmy Miller. I found it weird to overdub drums anyway, especially back then. That had to have been a very complicated task.


In his book he praises Preston when working with the Beatles.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-03-06 19:22 by TravelinMan.

Quote
TravelinMan

Quote
dcba
Yeah Johns kicked Taylor in the arse and pushed him back in his corner with his "you're just a lead guitarist in this band" verbal punch. But you had to be totally stupid to track bass and drums when you're co-working with Watts and Wyman.

Plus he loves Hopkins... that's why he doesn't have a single word for Preston?

To be fair, Richards, Taylor, and Wood are all talented and unique bass players and sometimes what they play is what a song calls for. Drums, yeah...no need unless you're Jimmy Miller. I found it weird to overdub drums anyway, especially back then. That had to have been a very complicated task.


In his book he praises Preston when working with the Beatles.

It seems complicated until someone great does it and makes it look easy. The best I've seen at it was Steve Feroni from Clapton's 80's bands. Tony Thompson (rip), Kenny Arnoff too. I worked on Lou Reed's New York and every bit of drums was added as the last element by Fred Meyer. Nothing fancy, no click, no offsets, maybe a punch or two. Just an overdub like any other instrument. Often we make the mistake because we can play an instrument well that we're in the class of these great "cats", still we can learn and strive for what seems impossible.

New York is a fantastic album with superb sound for its time. Great work

I find it interesting he snapped at Taylor for playing instruments other than his guitar...saying the Stones already had a drummer, etc.

But if I am not mistaken, Jimmy Miller played drums for the Stones, Bill Plummer on bass, Keith playing rhythm then overdubbing lead guitar, etc all had happened or were happening...not to mention maybe people like Dave Mason adding to tracks in the late 60s.

Wonder in Johns thought the same of those instances. Did he yell at Jimmy Miller?

This snippet makes him sound kind of like an @#$%&.

I will have to read the book. The guy worked on some amazing records.