Tell Me :
Talk
There's not much difference between all those tracks: the basics where recorded live with the entire band, than all the rest was overdubbed. In the case of BS only Richards' rhythm guitar, drums and bass where recorded live. Taylor is hardly audible on the finished version, and all the rest (half a dozen guitar tracks by Richards, sax, vocals) is overdubbed later in London.
Mathijs
I know, you can hear it all clearly. Maybe it's the flange on Keith's ryhthm, and it sounds like there's some on the acoustic as well, can't tell for sure. And Chrlie's drums don't have that *crack* that I love, it's more of a thud. I don't expect anyone to hear what I hear on this track. Hell, maybe it's because I played it on Hot Rocks from age 6 to 17 on a cheap turntable, and BS is on the inner part of the vinyl, where sound can be a problem without the right equipment, and maybe that just stuck with me over the years (I'm 47), even as I hear it in HQ. Don't get me wrong, when the song comes on the radio, warhorse that it is, it stays on. It's just that when I compare the "sound" to JJF, BS sounds inferior despite the nice separation.
I agree with you.
Drew
Thank you, especially if you're the only one.
Given that they were listening to an acetate of the session in Gimme Shelter, did Keith do an additional country lead overdub in Muscle Shoals that was edited out of the released version?
What we are hearing in the movie is not what the Stones are hearing in that hotel room. The version of BS we are hearing in that scene is a version with the first overdubs done in Olympic in late December 1969, or February to April 1970. This so-called acetate version already includes an overdubbed acoustic, lead vocals and double backup vocals, and various guitar parts by Richards, later replaced by other guitar parts.
Mathijs
Youre not the only one. You Sir, are spot on. Agree 100%
At the same time that lousy mix probably adds something. When I watch the "official video" the sound is better, probably because of some reverb. I understand what they were after, that muddy Mardi Grass swampy sound, but I dont hear the result until the last verse. Im with Jon Landau on this.
This prompted me find the original review. Here's what Landau wrote about BS:
"Brown Sugar": It begins with some magical raunch chords on the right channel. In the tradition of great guitar intros ("All Day and All of the Night," "Nineteenth Nervous Breakdown," and "Satisfaction" itself) it transfixes you: instant recognition, instant connection. Suddenly the electric guitar is joined by an acoustic guitar on the left channel, an acoustic that is merely strumming the chords that the electric is spitting out with such fury. It washes over the electric to no apparent purpose, stripping it momentarily of its authority and intensity. and so, in the first 15 seconds of the albums first cut we are presented with its major conflict: driving, intense, wide-open rock versus a controlled and manipulative musical conception determined to fill every whole and touch every base.
As soon as the voices come on, the acoustic recedes into inaudibility: on "Brown Sugar" wide open rock wins by a hair, but it is a hollow victory. Opening cuts on Stones albums have always been special, fro the early ones — "Not Fade Away," "Round and Round," and "Everybody Needs Somebody to Love: — with their promise of rock and roll to come, to the tour de force openings of the later albums — "Symphony for the Devil" and "Gimme Shelter" — which served as overwhelming entrances into a more complex musical world view.
At their best these opening cuts were statements of themes that transcended both the theme itself and the music that was to follow. As I listened to "Sticky Fingers," for the first time I thought "Brown Sugar" was good, but not that good. I certainly hoped it wasn't the best thing on the album. As it turns out, there are a few moments that surpass it but it still sets the tone for the album perfectly: middle-level Rolling Stones competence. The lowpoints aren't that low, but the high points, with one exception, aren't that high.
As to the performance itself, the chords, harmony, and song are powerful stuff. The instrumentation however, is too diffuse, occasionally undermining the vocals instead of supporting them. But when Richards joins Jagger for the last chorus they finally make it home free.
Drew
Perfect example of why I can't stand Landau. he overthinks everything. Instruments are too "diffuse". What a crock.
Well, reviewers are paid to overanalyze unfortunately. But he does manage to put into words what I've always felt, so I can't knock him for this. But I do knock him for calling SFTD "Symphony for the Devil".
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: March 6, 2013 18:21
Heard this in Home Depot (of all places) and it sounded fantastic.
I think they should have kept that guitar part in the intro that can be heard in the Gimme Shelter hotel room scene.
I think they should have kept that guitar part in the intro that can be heard in the Gimme Shelter hotel room scene.
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
Mathijs
()
Date: March 6, 2013 18:47
Quote
mstmst
The key diff with BS versus jjf, gs, and to some degree the other warhorses is that this is the sound of the band standing in the same room playing at the same time -shit hot from the road. Most of the others were layered together piece by piece in the studio.
There's not much difference between all those tracks: the basics where recorded live with the entire band, than all the rest was overdubbed. In the case of BS only Richards' rhythm guitar, drums and bass where recorded live. Taylor is hardly audible on the finished version, and all the rest (half a dozen guitar tracks by Richards, sax, vocals) is overdubbed later in London.
Mathijs
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
midimannz
()
Date: March 6, 2013 19:01
The into is as unmistakeable as JJF , fantastic!
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
RockinBud
()
Date: March 6, 2013 19:40
if an alien landed on Earth and wanted to know what was RocknRoll, play BS
It would get it!
RB
It would get it!
RB
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
68to72
()
Date: March 6, 2013 21:42
Brilliant brilliant song. And THE song that got me in to The Stones 'cause it was played to death in my house, all those years ago, and I loved it.
An absolute dance floor filler at my 'youth club' back in the 70's, and one of the few songs that me and my mates always used to (and were expected to) get up and dance to.
What a drag it is gettin' old
An absolute dance floor filler at my 'youth club' back in the 70's, and one of the few songs that me and my mates always used to (and were expected to) get up and dance to.
What a drag it is gettin' old
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
carlorossi
()
Date: March 6, 2013 22:04
Alright, maybe I'll be the only one w/anything negative to say. I do love the song, but there's something about the album version's sound that just doesn't appeal to my ears. Charlie's drums sound very dry, I don't really like the sound Keith gets out of his electric, the guitar mix in general sounds muddy and a bit dry as well, even with that acoustic chirping in. Give me the LYL version anyday! I don't know if my opinion holds water, cuz I LOVE the final studio mix of JJF, but Mick and some here have complained that JJF is the one that sounds too dry.
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: March 6, 2013 23:08
Muddy?? You can hear everything, and the guitars are nothing but rock history, imo.
I like the LYL-version as well, but they should have kept Keith's lead-riffing on all the live versions, too.
I like the LYL-version as well, but they should have kept Keith's lead-riffing on all the live versions, too.
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
GravityBoy
()
Date: March 6, 2013 23:42
Greatest opening two chords ever recorded.
Just the greatest.
Just the greatest.
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
odean73
()
Date: March 7, 2013 00:11
The ultimate rock & roll song of all time.
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
stonesrule
()
Date: March 7, 2013 01:40
I heard this song several times in 1969 and 1970, before and after horns were added.
From the first time on,it was clear that Brown Sugar is a simply IRRESISTIBLE song.
From the first time on,it was clear that Brown Sugar is a simply IRRESISTIBLE song.
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
carlorossi
()
Date: March 7, 2013 02:30
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Muddy?? You can hear everything, and the guitars are nothing but rock history, imo.
I know, you can hear it all clearly. Maybe it's the flange on Keith's ryhthm, and it sounds like there's some on the acoustic as well, can't tell for sure. And Chrlie's drums don't have that *crack* that I love, it's more of a thud. I don't expect anyone to hear what I hear on this track. Hell, maybe it's because I played it on Hot Rocks from age 6 to 17 on a cheap turntable, and BS is on the inner part of the vinyl, where sound can be a problem without the right equipment, and maybe that just stuck with me over the years (I'm 47), even as I hear it in HQ. Don't get me wrong, when the song comes on the radio, warhorse that it is, it stays on. It's just that when I compare the "sound" to JJF, BS sounds inferior despite the nice separation.
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
drewmaster
()
Date: March 7, 2013 04:40
Quote
carlorossiQuote
DandelionPowderman
Muddy?? You can hear everything, and the guitars are nothing but rock history, imo.
I know, you can hear it all clearly. Maybe it's the flange on Keith's ryhthm, and it sounds like there's some on the acoustic as well, can't tell for sure. And Chrlie's drums don't have that *crack* that I love, it's more of a thud. I don't expect anyone to hear what I hear on this track. Hell, maybe it's because I played it on Hot Rocks from age 6 to 17 on a cheap turntable, and BS is on the inner part of the vinyl, where sound can be a problem without the right equipment, and maybe that just stuck with me over the years (I'm 47), even as I hear it in HQ. Don't get me wrong, when the song comes on the radio, warhorse that it is, it stays on. It's just that when I compare the "sound" to JJF, BS sounds inferior despite the nice separation.
I agree with you.
Drew
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
carlorossi
()
Date: March 7, 2013 05:59
Quote
drewmaster
I agree with you. Drew
Thank you, especially if you're the only one.
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: March 7, 2013 06:54
Quote
MathijsQuote
mstmst
The key diff with BS versus jjf, gs, and to some degree the other warhorses is that this is the sound of the band standing in the same room playing at the same time -shit hot from the road. Most of the others were layered together piece by piece in the studio.
There's not much difference between all those tracks: the basics where recorded live with the entire band, than all the rest was overdubbed. In the case of BS only Richards' rhythm guitar, drums and bass where recorded live. Taylor is hardly audible on the finished version, and all the rest (half a dozen guitar tracks by Richards, sax, vocals) is overdubbed later in London.
Mathijs
Given that they were listening to an acetate of the session in Gimme Shelter, did Keith do an additional country lead overdub in Muscle Shoals that was edited out of the released version?
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
Mathijs
()
Date: March 7, 2013 10:39
Quote
71TeleQuote
MathijsQuote
mstmst
The key diff with BS versus jjf, gs, and to some degree the other warhorses is that this is the sound of the band standing in the same room playing at the same time -shit hot from the road. Most of the others were layered together piece by piece in the studio.
There's not much difference between all those tracks: the basics where recorded live with the entire band, than all the rest was overdubbed. In the case of BS only Richards' rhythm guitar, drums and bass where recorded live. Taylor is hardly audible on the finished version, and all the rest (half a dozen guitar tracks by Richards, sax, vocals) is overdubbed later in London.
Mathijs
Given that they were listening to an acetate of the session in Gimme Shelter, did Keith do an additional country lead overdub in Muscle Shoals that was edited out of the released version?
What we are hearing in the movie is not what the Stones are hearing in that hotel room. The version of BS we are hearing in that scene is a version with the first overdubs done in Olympic in late December 1969, or February to April 1970. This so-called acetate version already includes an overdubbed acoustic, lead vocals and double backup vocals, and various guitar parts by Richards, later replaced by other guitar parts.
Mathijs
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
Come On
()
Date: March 7, 2013 10:43
Nice song but I didn't jumped out my cloth when I'd heard it the first time...same goes for JJF and Honky Tonk....Nowadays, those tunes is sacred rock classics...for me too....
2 1 2 0
2 1 2 0
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
Redhotcarpet
()
Date: March 7, 2013 11:25
Quote
carlorossi
Alright, maybe I'll be the only one w/anything negative to say. I do love the song, but there's something about the album version's sound that just doesn't appeal to my ears. Charlie's drums sound very dry, I don't really like the sound Keith gets out of his electric, the guitar mix in general sounds muddy and a bit dry as well, even with that acoustic chirping in. Give me the LYL version anyday! I don't know if my opinion holds water, cuz I LOVE the final studio mix of JJF, but Mick and some here have complained that JJF is the one that sounds too dry.
Youre not the only one. You Sir, are spot on. Agree 100%
At the same time that lousy mix probably adds something. When I watch the "official video" the sound is better, probably because of some reverb. I understand what they were after, that muddy Mardi Grass swampy sound, but I dont hear the result until the last verse. Im with Jon Landau on this.
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
drewmaster
()
Date: March 7, 2013 14:33
Quote
Redhotcarpet
Im with Jon Landau on this.
This prompted me find the original review. Here's what Landau wrote about BS:
"Brown Sugar": It begins with some magical raunch chords on the right channel. In the tradition of great guitar intros ("All Day and All of the Night," "Nineteenth Nervous Breakdown," and "Satisfaction" itself) it transfixes you: instant recognition, instant connection. Suddenly the electric guitar is joined by an acoustic guitar on the left channel, an acoustic that is merely strumming the chords that the electric is spitting out with such fury. It washes over the electric to no apparent purpose, stripping it momentarily of its authority and intensity. and so, in the first 15 seconds of the albums first cut we are presented with its major conflict: driving, intense, wide-open rock versus a controlled and manipulative musical conception determined to fill every whole and touch every base.
As soon as the voices come on, the acoustic recedes into inaudibility: on "Brown Sugar" wide open rock wins by a hair, but it is a hollow victory. Opening cuts on Stones albums have always been special, fro the early ones — "Not Fade Away," "Round and Round," and "Everybody Needs Somebody to Love: — with their promise of rock and roll to come, to the tour de force openings of the later albums — "Symphony for the Devil" and "Gimme Shelter" — which served as overwhelming entrances into a more complex musical world view.
At their best these opening cuts were statements of themes that transcended both the theme itself and the music that was to follow. As I listened to "Sticky Fingers," for the first time I thought "Brown Sugar" was good, but not that good. I certainly hoped it wasn't the best thing on the album. As it turns out, there are a few moments that surpass it but it still sets the tone for the album perfectly: middle-level Rolling Stones competence. The lowpoints aren't that low, but the high points, with one exception, aren't that high.
As to the performance itself, the chords, harmony, and song are powerful stuff. The instrumentation however, is too diffuse, occasionally undermining the vocals instead of supporting them. But when Richards joins Jagger for the last chorus they finally make it home free.
Drew
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: March 7, 2013 18:01
Quote
drewmasterQuote
Redhotcarpet
Im with Jon Landau on this.
This prompted me find the original review. Here's what Landau wrote about BS:
"Brown Sugar": It begins with some magical raunch chords on the right channel. In the tradition of great guitar intros ("All Day and All of the Night," "Nineteenth Nervous Breakdown," and "Satisfaction" itself) it transfixes you: instant recognition, instant connection. Suddenly the electric guitar is joined by an acoustic guitar on the left channel, an acoustic that is merely strumming the chords that the electric is spitting out with such fury. It washes over the electric to no apparent purpose, stripping it momentarily of its authority and intensity. and so, in the first 15 seconds of the albums first cut we are presented with its major conflict: driving, intense, wide-open rock versus a controlled and manipulative musical conception determined to fill every whole and touch every base.
As soon as the voices come on, the acoustic recedes into inaudibility: on "Brown Sugar" wide open rock wins by a hair, but it is a hollow victory. Opening cuts on Stones albums have always been special, fro the early ones — "Not Fade Away," "Round and Round," and "Everybody Needs Somebody to Love: — with their promise of rock and roll to come, to the tour de force openings of the later albums — "Symphony for the Devil" and "Gimme Shelter" — which served as overwhelming entrances into a more complex musical world view.
At their best these opening cuts were statements of themes that transcended both the theme itself and the music that was to follow. As I listened to "Sticky Fingers," for the first time I thought "Brown Sugar" was good, but not that good. I certainly hoped it wasn't the best thing on the album. As it turns out, there are a few moments that surpass it but it still sets the tone for the album perfectly: middle-level Rolling Stones competence. The lowpoints aren't that low, but the high points, with one exception, aren't that high.
As to the performance itself, the chords, harmony, and song are powerful stuff. The instrumentation however, is too diffuse, occasionally undermining the vocals instead of supporting them. But when Richards joins Jagger for the last chorus they finally make it home free.
Drew
Perfect example of why I can't stand Landau. he overthinks everything. Instruments are too "diffuse". What a crock.
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
Roll73
()
Date: March 7, 2013 18:39
Keith's cry of 'Yeah!' at the very end of this sums it up. He knew they'd well and truly nailed it. I agree with the few that something about the recording of this does grate somewhat. Would love to have heard this recorded in the studio during later phases of the Stones career. Imagine a version done during the Black and Blue sessions - or a Bigger Bang for that matter.
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
carlorossi
()
Date: March 7, 2013 19:42
Quote
71Tele
Perfect example of why I can't stand Landau. he overthinks everything. Instruments are too "diffuse". What a crock.
Well, reviewers are paid to overanalyze unfortunately. But he does manage to put into words what I've always felt, so I can't knock him for this. But I do knock him for calling SFTD "Symphony for the Devil".
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
kish_stoned
()
Date: March 7, 2013 19:46
Brown sugar one of the best with jumping jack flash and honky tonk women and jagger plays good guitar,lot of fans thought it was richard.
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
ryanpow
()
Date: March 7, 2013 21:36
This song is an example of how the stones really shouldn't be put in the category of "classic rock", its just pure R&R along the lines of Little Richard and Chuck Berry.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-07 21:39 by ryanpow.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-07 21:39 by ryanpow.
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
Send It To me
()
Date: March 8, 2013 05:47
Every song on the second disc of hot rocks was written and recorded in 20 month period - amazing. Imagine if Jack Flash, Beggars Banquet, Let It Bleed, Brown Sugar and Wild Horses had all been released as a single album!
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
midimannz
()
Date: March 8, 2013 07:00
I am sooooooooo looking forward to the BluRay rerelease of Sticky Fingers! If it is as clear as the new Tom Petty 'Mojo' I'll be in heaven
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
GravityBoy
()
Date: March 8, 2013 09:37
I don't think the percussion/drums on this track should be underestimated.
There is a great low underbeat (jungle beat?) going on, something they never captured live (except at Altamont?).
What was Charlie doing to play that? Was he assisted by someone/thing?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-08 09:38 by GravityBoy.
There is a great low underbeat (jungle beat?) going on, something they never captured live (except at Altamont?).
What was Charlie doing to play that? Was he assisted by someone/thing?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-08 09:38 by GravityBoy.
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
kish_stoned
()
Date: March 8, 2013 13:48
PLAY IT LOUD AND GET YOUR ROCKS OFF
ON BROWN SUGAR.YEA,YEA,YEA
ON BROWN SUGAR.YEA,YEA,YEA
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: March 8, 2013 13:53
I just played it for the first time in ages and it's just a really great, get yer arse moving, rock song and recording with loads of ace little touches hidden within the arrangement.
An example of a perfect rock and roll single.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-08 13:55 by His Majesty.
An example of a perfect rock and roll single.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-08 13:55 by His Majesty.
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: March 8, 2013 14:02
Quote
kish_stoned
Brown sugar one of the best with jumping jack flash and honky tonk women and jagger plays good guitar,lot of fans thought it was richard.
Re: Track Talk: Brown Sugar
Posted by:
KeithNacho
()
Date: March 8, 2013 14:05
A perfect clasic rock song............
I know that Jagger wrote the song with the help of the G tuning. Maybe the verses and chorus, but the riff....the riff is very different from the rest of the song, and i bet it is Richard's 100%
SMU is another example, a 2 chords developed by Jagger but with an improved 100%Richard's riff (just hear the difference between the initial reggae version and the definitive one)
Well, that's my opinion
I know that Jagger wrote the song with the help of the G tuning. Maybe the verses and chorus, but the riff....the riff is very different from the rest of the song, and i bet it is Richard's 100%
SMU is another example, a 2 chords developed by Jagger but with an improved 100%Richard's riff (just hear the difference between the initial reggae version and the definitive one)
Well, that's my opinion
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.