ok, so what it is that makes a keith song his?
obviously i can't see mick singing the worst, but i could see him singing before they make me run or wanna hold you.
how is it that keith's attitude comes through (or is created) in his own solo songs that he does with the band? how is it that he can write songs that only work best for him to sing... and why don't they compare to his solo work?

Keith is all over tons of songs. Mick sings Love Is Strong, but that's a Keith song.

... what is the question? you know Keith generates a lot more music than he ends up singing lead on, so what are you asking?
is it "how do they decide who's going to sing what?"
(and sorry, but i have to say it: imagining Mick singing BTMMR of all things is pretty weird!)


"What do you want - what?!"
- Keith

Because it's what Keith wants to say, baby. When a song of his goes to Mick, Mick usually rewrites the words, often significantly. Check out the "Voodoo Lounge" boots for confirmation of that. Keith probably keeps the ones that make a statement he wants to make, and also are in his range. Keith probably can picture what he wants Mick to sing, and may write the "Mick" songs with him in mind.

>> Keith probably can picture what he wants Mick to sing, and may write the "Mick" songs with him in mind. <<

smile: i think it's often more than "may". one of Keith's main jobs for 42+ years has been to generate music for Mick to sing lead on, and he's mighty good at it.
some numbers are pretty clearly better suited to one Twin's voice than the other's, but it's interesting to consider the tracks that could have gone either way.
Keith's talked about laying down the vocals to All About You just as a guide for Mick, but then the band all said Keith's rendition should stay.
Can't Be Seen, on the other hand, is a number that i can't imagine Mick singing even one note of. which has nothing to do with the mood or the message -
the vocal melody line is simply nothing like what Mick does with his voice.


"What do you want - what?!"
- Keith

its funny canadian sway i can see mick singing the worst but i can't see him singing before they make me run at all!!!!

A Keith song is sitting on a chair, guitar, cigarette, wodka, jazz, soul, blues, a lick here and there, eyes closed, some words, some melody and that voice...

Just isn't Mick.

Hey,

I got a version of Mick singing YOU GOT THE SILVER as an example.

Best Regards,

PECMAN

here's a bit of an insight from Keith, posted by BrownEyedGirll over on rs.com back in february:
"Writing with the Stones, I really write for Mick to sing. If I was going to write Eileen for Mick,
I wouldn't let it float so much melodically. I would use more precise meters,
and I would use the verse, chorus and hooks in a more obvious way.
But since I'm writing for myself, I can let them float a little more."
- from an article by Jim DeRogatis in the 22 November 1992 Chicago Sun Times


"What do you want - what?!"
- Keith

ok, before they make me run seems to be out of some people's frame of reference, but im sure we can all imagine mick singing happy (he seems to dominate the chorus on live versions in the early 70s).
it seem keith songs are of three different breeds...
rocking pseudo country-ish type tunes - ie happy, before they make me run
or slow jazz ballads- this place is empty, all about you, losing my touch etc
mid tempo not quite rock - infamy, theif in the night
(we'll pretend he hasn't messed with reggae... ie you don't have to mean it)

it seems if the song is too country for the stones, keith does it
if it is too mellow for the stones to do... keith does it
so are the stones made of what is in between these lines?

Canadian, you lost me totally. what in the world do you mean by "too __ for the Stones"??
sorry, but that's such a kooky thing to say, in about seven ways at once!

(and no, let's not pretend the Stones have never done reggae-flavored stuff.
the Stones have fine broad horizons - always have. trying to put fences around them, or around Keith, is [a] sad, and way too late.)


"What do you want - what?!"
- Keith



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2005-11-23 18:26 by with sssoul.

What are "the stones" to you, csway? You seem to have a much narrower notion of their music than... they do. They've been playing reggae rhythms for over years now. Too infrequently, IMO.

It's interesting to consider who writes what, but that's not exactly what you're on to?

cc

other than "silver" are there any other boots with the lead singer being switched??

sure, HalfNanker - the Voodoo outtakes are full of Keith-LV demos of numbers that Mick wound up singing lead on;
and there are Keith-LV demos of Fight, Gimmie Shelter and Dandelion (when it was still called Sometimes Happy Sometimes Blue).
apparently there's also a Keith-LV version of Rip This Joint, but it's not in circulation - i don't know if anyone's actually heard it.


"What do you want - what?!"
- Keith

would love an upload of that keith "Fight" from anyone... I have one disc of Dirty Work outtakes (Back to Zero), and that's not on it.

cc

i'd love to, CC, but i don't have it on my computer - i hope someone else comes up with it for you.
considering the spirit in which Fight was written, it always strikes me as such a riotous joy that Mick wound up taking the LV duties on it -
smile: ahhh, the Rolling Stones and their ways to get along! :E


"What do you want - what?!"
- Keith

sssoul, which boots do i need to hear those?

i'm sure they're all on other boots as well, but for example:
Voodoo Stew has a bunch of the Keith-LV demos of Voodoo Lounge tracks;
the early Dandelion is on the Black Box;
Gimmie Shelter is (for no sensible reason whatsoever) on Toronto Blues;
Fight is on Crushed Pearl.


"What do you want - what?!"
- Keith