>> I knew this type of archive release would be possible now that the ABKCO and post ABKCO stuff are unified under the same enterprise (Universal) <<

well ... like i said i'll be keeping the incense lit for these cooperative efforts to go forward smoothly and fruitfully.
the fact that ABKCO and the Stones currently share the same distributor doesn't "unify" them -
the parties still have to agree on any cooperative efforts, and that kind of agreement hasn't always been easy to come by.

GYYYO ! Complete show and DVD footage. This is great news !

It's generally known that about half of Mick's vocals on Ya-Ya's were overdubbed in the studio. So here's a question: Will the previously unreleased tracks have vocal overdubs on them? If so, when were these overdubs recorded? Were they recorded in 1970? Or are they being recorded NOW??? Could it be possible that we will be hearing the voice of a SIXTY-SIX-year-old Mick Jagger "fixing" vocal "mistakes" he made when he was TWENTY-SIX???

Quote
tatters
It's generally known that about half of Mick's vocals on Ya-Ya's were overdubbed in the studio. So here's a question: Will the previously unreleased tracks have vocal overdubs on them? If so, when were these overdubs recorded? Were they recorded in 1970? Or are they being recorded NOW??? Could it be possible that we will be hearing the voice of a SIXTY-SIX-year-old Mick Jagger "fixing" vocal "mistakes" he made when he was TWENTY-SIX???

These days the vocal flaws can be fixed with autotune.

Quote
Britney

Quote
tatters
It's generally known that about half of Mick's vocals on Ya-Ya's were overdubbed in the studio. So here's a question: Will the previously unreleased tracks have vocal overdubs on them? If so, when were these overdubs recorded? Were they recorded in 1970? Or are they being recorded NOW??? Could it be possible that we will be hearing the voice of a SIXTY-SIX-year-old Mick Jagger "fixing" vocal "mistakes" he made when he was TWENTY-SIX???

These days the vocal flaws can be fixed with autotune.

In 2000, for the Deluxe edition of the Who's 1970 album Live At Leeds, Roger Daltrey went into the studio and "corrected" some of the vocals he recorded THIRTY years earlier. What was he thinking? Probably he was thinking "I can do it better than THAT!" I'm hoping Mick isn't thinking the same thing.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-07-04 18:00 by tatters.

great news...!!!

Quote
Britney

Quote
tatters
It's generally known that about half of Mick's vocals on Ya-Ya's were overdubbed in the studio. So here's a question: Will the previously unreleased tracks have vocal overdubs on them? If so, when were these overdubs recorded? Were they recorded in 1970? Or are they being recorded NOW??? Could it be possible that we will be hearing the voice of a SIXTY-SIX-year-old Mick Jagger "fixing" vocal "mistakes" he made when he was TWENTY-SIX???

These days the vocal flaws can be fixed with autotune.

of course. but autotune doesnt help in case of other problems, like missing words, wrong lyrics, microphone malfunctions etc. with todays digital wizardry, they can always try to insert a vocal from a different show to replace the unwanted performance or parts of it. but of course, there are limitations, and in case a repair is not possible, all you can do is replace certain parts by overdubbing - as long as the original vocalist is still alive, that is!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-07-04 19:40 by alimente.

Three shows were recorded. If they need to fly anything in they will. It's quite possible though that they did indeed do all they needed to with ALL recorded tracks as far as fixing any drop outs and whatever editing (imagine the full lyric version of SFTD - nothing has been said about that) and any overdubs. It's just like any other album - they don't just work on what is put on the album.

when it comes to a deluxe ya ya's, i'll see it before i belive it

Hey Taylor Era - read the liner notes in Sticky Fingers. The publishing for the album (for every song) is ABKCO Music.

Same with Sweet Virginia, Loving Cup, All Down The Line, Stop Breaking Down and Shine A Light on Exile - which points to the fact that those are Sticky Fingers leftovers ie they were finished for SF.

What record label they are released on means nothing.

Quote
alimente

Quote
Britney

Quote
tatters
It's generally known that about half of Mick's vocals on Ya-Ya's were overdubbed in the studio. So here's a question: Will the previously unreleased tracks have vocal overdubs on them? If so, when were these overdubs recorded? Were they recorded in 1970? Or are they being recorded NOW??? Could it be possible that we will be hearing the voice of a SIXTY-SIX-year-old Mick Jagger "fixing" vocal "mistakes" he made when he was TWENTY-SIX???

These days the vocal flaws can be fixed with autotune.

of course. but autotune doesnt help in case of other problems, like missing words, wrong lyrics, microphone malfunctions etc. with todays digital wizardry, they can always try to insert a vocal from a different show to replace the unwanted performance or parts of it. but of course, there are limitations, and in case a repair is not possible, all you can do is replace certain parts by overdubbing - as long as the original vocalist is still alive, that is!

The original vocalist is still alive, but would you WANT the Stones to put out previously unreleased live tracks with some of the vocals recorded in 1969 and some of the vocals recorded in 2009? How would that be any different from putting out a 40th anniversary edition of the Gimme Shelter film, and having Mick say, "I don't like the way I did that 'Brothers and Sisters, Why Are We Fighting?' speech. I want to do it again, but with more of a 'You Want A Piece Of Me?' bad-ass attitude. I'll put on the same clothes I wore at Altamont, we'll film it on a soundstage, and no one will know the difference."

That would be a TRAVESTY, wouldn't it? Well, I think releasing live Stones tracks with performances by a 66-year-old Mick and 25-year-old Keith would be just as much of a travesty.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2009-07-04 21:48 by tatters.

Quote
skipstone
Three shows were recorded. If they need to fly anything in they will. It's quite possible though that they did indeed do all they needed to with ALL recorded tracks as far as fixing any drop outs and whatever editing (imagine the full lyric version of SFTD - nothing has been said about that) and any overdubs. It's just like any other album - they don't just work on what is put on the album.

Yeah, but they had three shows to work with in 1970 and even though Mick presumably chose his best performance of each song, he still decided to re-record 50% of his vocals. It IS possible that all the necessary overdubs for all the unreleased tracks WERE done back in 1970, but maybe not. Maybe they didn't start overdubbing until after they had already chosen the songs they wanted to release, in which case, the unreleased songs would still exist only in raw form. If that's the case, then I think you've to just put them out "as is", with no overdubs at all, The problem is, if these tracks were to be inserted into the existing album, recreating the correct running order of the original setlist, the differences between the raw tracks and the tracks with studio-perfect vocals would be noticeable. Might be best to put the previously unreleased tracks on a separate disc.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-07-04 22:11 by tatters.

It's been a while but I recall Midnight Rambler being overdubless on Ya-Ya's, as well as Love In Vain. I think the rest of them all have vocal O/Ds. Can't recall if HTW is totally live or not. You can hear the difference, especially on headphones. It's just been a while since I listened to it.

I've never understood that personally. Leave the phrasing the way it was LIVE. Like how JJF's chorus was different (better).

It was most likely industry standard to finish all recorded tracks and then select. They did that with Love You Live.

I don't understand what's with all the talk about overdubbing, maybe the singing isn't perfect on original recordings but that's how live shows are and it can't be worse than on Love You Live anyway...

Here's some wishful thinking: wouldn't it be amazing if in addition to the announced entire 1969 show (recorded in NY), the EP consisted of rarely played songs from other shows (Gimme Shelter, I'm Free, Brown Sugar, The Sun is Shining, plus maybe something from Hyde Park). I still can't figure out on how many discs are they gonna organize all this with the BB King and Ike & Tina performances + bonus DVD (not to mention they should also fit in the original Ya-Ya's in there)...

Quote
tatters

Quote
alimente

Quote
Britney

Quote
tatters
It's generally known that about half of Mick's vocals on Ya-Ya's were overdubbed in the studio. So here's a question: Will the previously unreleased tracks have vocal overdubs on them? If so, when were these overdubs recorded? Were they recorded in 1970? Or are they being recorded NOW??? Could it be possible that we will be hearing the voice of a SIXTY-SIX-year-old Mick Jagger "fixing" vocal "mistakes" he made when he was TWENTY-SIX???

These days the vocal flaws can be fixed with autotune.

of course. but autotune doesnt help in case of other problems, like missing words, wrong lyrics, microphone malfunctions etc. with todays digital wizardry, they can always try to insert a vocal from a different show to replace the unwanted performance or parts of it. but of course, there are limitations, and in case a repair is not possible, all you can do is replace certain parts by overdubbing - as long as the original vocalist is still alive, that is!

The original vocalist is still alive, but would you WANT the Stones to put out previously unreleased live tracks with some of the vocals recorded in 1969 and some of the vocals recorded in 2009? How would that be any different from putting out a 40th anniversary edition of the Gimme Shelter film, and having Mick say, "I don't like the way I did that 'Brothers and Sisters, Why Are We Fighting?' speech. I want to do it again, but with more of a 'You Want A Piece Of Me?' bad-ass attitude. I'll put on the same clothes I wore at Altamont, we'll film it on a soundstage, and no one will know the difference."

That would be a TRAVESTY, wouldn't it? Well, I think releasing live Stones tracks with performances by a 66-year-old Mick and 25-year-old Keith would be just as much of a travesty.

Of course your example would be a travesty, but repairing a vocal is not the same thing. Lets say they want to include Prodigal Son and they have three recordings from three different shows. They would not use the version thats on the Criterion release because there, Keiths guitar is badly out of tune. So there are two versions left. One is an overall lacklustre performance, and one is great - both Mick and Keith top-notch. But on the top-notch performance they have a serious technical problem, a humming noise from the microphone while Mick sings the phrase "well a poor boy" and later on a distortion when he sings the phrase "feed my swine". They try to fix it with the exact phrases from the other performances. No luck, the timing is a tad different, it sounds unnatural. So what can they do? Ring Mick up and tell him "Hey, we need you to repair some seconds of Prodigal Son. Dont redo the complete vocals, just redo the two @#$%& up phrases". Im sure that Mick, the professional that he is, would redo the two phrases by shadowing his 1969 voice so close that apart from us die-hards who could possibly compare it to an audience recording nobody else would even notice it. If it comes down to either have an official release in perfect quality of a 1969 live track thats not already featured on YaYas with a few minor, close to unnoticable fixes or no official release of this track at all, I know for sure what my choice would be!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-07-05 00:05 by alimente.

Got an email today from amazon.co.jp, urging me to get a copy of Yaya's in a "special SHM edition". Looks like they know the good stuff is coming.

Just the other day I was writing on the exile thread about how I'd almost rather have Ya'Ya's outtakes instead. Hey! Anyway, great news!

I don't think I would approve or support Mick fixing a recording from 1969 other than what he did in 1970.

So let's hope that is the case and that case only.

Whale,

Quote
Whale
Got an email today from amazon.co.jp, urging me to get a copy of Yaya's in a "special SHM edition". Looks like they know the good stuff is coming.

That SHM-CD Yer Ya-Ya's has already released on June 24.
It's different from 40th anniversary special of November. Don't mix up.

SHM-CD Jump Back is announced to be released on Aug 12, though.

Quote
tatters

Quote
Britney

Quote
tatters
It's generally known that about half of Mick's vocals on Ya-Ya's were overdubbed in the studio. So here's a question: Will the previously unreleased tracks have vocal overdubs on them? If so, when were these overdubs recorded? Were they recorded in 1970? Or are they being recorded NOW??? Could it be possible that we will be hearing the voice of a SIXTY-SIX-year-old Mick Jagger "fixing" vocal "mistakes" he made when he was TWENTY-SIX???

These days the vocal flaws can be fixed with autotune.

In 2000, for the Deluxe edition of the Who's 1970 album Live At Leeds, Roger Daltrey went into the studio and "corrected" some of the vocals he recorded THIRTY years earlier. What was he thinking? Probably he was thinking "I can do it better than THAT!" I'm hoping Mick isn't thinking the same thing.

now if Jagger did that then I would puke ! surely not....I'd rather hear a Ronnie Wood solo from 2000 onwards anyday....

Quote
skipstone

It was most likely industry standard to finish all recorded tracks and then select. They did that with Love You Live.

Probably the first thing they did was listen to all three concerts in order to select the strongest performance of each of the sixteen songs. The question remains, What did they do next? Did they record overdubs for EACH of those 16 tracks and THEN select which 10 to put on the album, in which case, the unreleased six are ready to go, or, did they listen to those 16 tracks some more, decided which 10 to put on the album, and THEN began recording overdubs for ONLY those ten tracks that had already been selected for release, in which case, the unreleased six would have to either be overdubbed NOW, or released "as is".



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-07-05 18:01 by tatters.

Quote
alimente
Of course your example would be a travesty, but repairing a vocal is not the same thing. Lets say they want to include Prodigal Son and they have three recordings from three different shows. They would not use the version thats on the Criterion release because there, Keiths guitar is badly out of tune. So there are two versions left. One is an overall lacklustre performance, and one is great - both Mick and Keith top-notch. But on the top-notch performance they have a serious technical problem, a humming noise from the microphone while Mick sings the phrase "well a poor boy" and later on a distortion when he sings the phrase "feed my swine". They try to fix it with the exact phrases from the other performances. No luck, the timing is a tad different, it sounds unnatural. So what can they do? Ring Mick up and tell him "Hey, we need you to repair some seconds of Prodigal Son. Dont redo the complete vocals, just redo the two @#$%& up phrases". Im sure that Mick, the professional that he is, would redo the two phrases by shadowing his 1969 voice so close that apart from us die-hards who could possibly compare it to an audience recording nobody else would even notice it. If it comes down to either have an official release in perfect quality of a 1969 live track thats not already featured on YaYas with a few minor, close to unnoticable fixes or no official release of this track at all, I know for sure what my choice would be!

I think that repairing a vocal recorded FORTY years ago IS just as much of a travesty as reshooting a scene in a forty-year-old movie. I have no problem with overdubs on officially released live albums, but I think there HAS to be some kind of sensible statute of limitations. Personally, I would NEVER record a vocal overdub on a live track that was more than one year old. To do it after FORTY years, when you are old enough to be the GRANDFATHER of the kid who's singing on the original tape, is a JOKE. I don't care if it's only a line or two. Any artist who is any kind of artist at all would have to say "I just can't do that. I'm just not THAT PERSON any more. I may still do the world's greatest impersonation of that person, but I am NO LONGER THAT PERSON.

Put these tracks out, by all means, but put them out RAW, humming, buzzing, distortion, and all. It'll sound authentic, because it IS authentic. You might have to put them on a separate disc, with a little disclaimer, telling people that this material has never been tampered with in the studio, and therefore, won't sound they way they normally would expect an official live release to sound, that it sounds more like a really good bootleg, but that the band has made an artistic decision that to tamper with these tracks after so many years have passed wouldn't be the right thing to do, that the ONLY way to release these tracks NOW is to release them raw.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2009-07-05 18:40 by tatters.

Hey Taylor Era - read the liner notes in Sticky Fingers. The publishing for the album (for every song) is ABKCO Music.

..ok, thanks, didnt know that; thought only BS and WH were under that

Could it be possible that we will be hearing the voice of a SIXTY-SIX-year-old Mick Jagger "fixing" vocal "mistakes" he made when he was TWENTY-SIX???

These days the vocal flaws can be fixed with autotune.

..I sure hope not, that we dont get the 66 year old version

anyhow, what's wrong with 'vocal flaws?' I mean, rock and roll aint supposed to be pretty or perfect, anyway ..is it?? it's not supposed to sound like it was recorded in a sterilized environment, like a hospital operating room, is it?? I mean, unless yer Def Leopard or something, its not.

With these snippets of the Altamont sb being leaked, guess it would be beyond hope that the dvd will have extensive video of Altamont.

Quote
tatters

Quote
alimente
Of course your example would be a travesty, but repairing a vocal is not the same thing. Lets say they want to include Prodigal Son and they have three recordings from three different shows. They would not use the version thats on the Criterion release because there, Keiths guitar is badly out of tune. So there are two versions left. One is an overall lacklustre performance, and one is great - both Mick and Keith top-notch. But on the top-notch performance they have a serious technical problem, a humming noise from the microphone while Mick sings the phrase "well a poor boy" and later on a distortion when he sings the phrase "feed my swine". They try to fix it with the exact phrases from the other performances. No luck, the timing is a tad different, it sounds unnatural. So what can they do? Ring Mick up and tell him "Hey, we need you to repair some seconds of Prodigal Son. Dont redo the complete vocals, just redo the two @#$%& up phrases". Im sure that Mick, the professional that he is, would redo the two phrases by shadowing his 1969 voice so close that apart from us die-hards who could possibly compare it to an audience recording nobody else would even notice it. If it comes down to either have an official release in perfect quality of a 1969 live track thats not already featured on YaYas with a few minor, close to unnoticable fixes or no official release of this track at all, I know for sure what my choice would be!

I think that repairing a vocal recorded FORTY years ago IS just as much of a travesty as reshooting a scene in a forty-year-old movie. I have no problem with overdubs on officially released live albums, but I think there HAS to be some kind of sensible statute of limitations. Personally, I would NEVER record a vocal overdub on a live track that was more than one year old. To do it after FORTY years, when you are old enough to be the GRANDFATHER of the kid who's singing on the original tape, is a JOKE. I don't care if it's only a line or two. Any artist who is any kind of artist at all would have to say "I just can't do that. I'm just not THAT PERSON any more. I may still do the world's greatest impersonation of that person, but I am NO LONGER THAT PERSON.

Put these tracks out, by all means, but put them out RAW, humming, buzzing, distortion, and all. It'll sound authentic, because it IS authentic. You might have to put them on a separate disc, with a little disclaimer, telling people that this material has never been tampered with in the studio, and therefore, won't sound they way they normally would expect an official live release to sound, that it sounds more like a really good bootleg, but that the band has made an artistic decision that to tamper with these tracks after so many years have passed wouldn't be the right thing to do, that the ONLY way to release these tracks NOW is to release them raw.

You're a purist, but that's usually not the way artists and record companies approach a live album. For them, a live album is a "product" first and an "authentic historical document" to a much lesser extent. Artists in particular usually don't want "warts 'n' all" stuff out there. It is possible, however, that the Stones quality control has degraded over the years to an extent that they simply do not care anymore - as the butchering of "Rocks Off" on Live Licks may indicate. I would say - let's just wait and see how things develop, it's useless to discuss this until we have the final product in our hands.

Yeah - once again, we don't really know yet do we? This is the year of NOTHING...

If this rumour is true, I am hoping they will release the songs as they were recorded in 1969, warts 'n' all.

Quote
with sssoul
>> I knew this type of archive release would be possible now that the ABKCO and post ABKCO stuff are unified under the same enterprise (Universal) <<

well ... like i said i'll be keeping the incense lit for these cooperative efforts to go forward smoothly and fruitfully.
the fact that ABKCO and the Stones currently share the same distributor doesn't "unify" them -
the parties still have to agree on any cooperative efforts, and that kind of agreement hasn't always been easy to come by.

That's absolutely correct, with sssoul! The distribution is "unfied", but the labels aren't, it's still ABKCO (pre 1971) and The Rolling Stones.

The labels don't give anything away for free. The best situation for us fans is a situation where the Stones need something from ABKCO and ABKCO needs something from the Stones at the same time, which seems to be the case with the expanded Exile/YaYas projects.

But in case the Stones want to release something where ABKCO has no say, El Mocambo 1977 for example, the situation is obviously very different!

Man I had posted weeks ago wishing for complete SBDs of Ya-Yas and Altamont shows...and now it's coming true (hopefully)...

Quote
StonesFanatic
Man I had posted weeks ago wishing for complete SBDs of Ya-Yas and Altamont shows...and now it's coming true (hopefully)...

Wish for more! I mean, who knows...

Vilhelm
Nordic Stones Vikings