Overdubbing guitar 40 years after the fact is rediculous. Exile is about a time, a place and all of the lore attached. It's about that muddy sound and a ton of wicked tunes. The last thing I want is new overdubs.
Do your best to clean up the recordings and release what you've got.

I just don't think there are a sufficient number of completed unreleased tracks to make a deluxe edition worthwhile. Would UMG sanction the release of EOMS if the bonus disk contained bootleg quality material and incomplete songs?

Quote
Marhsall
Leave them as they are and release them!!! That's the point of my 'overproduction' thread!

If this rumor is indeed true and knowing the way the Stones work, these tracks likely only have a single guitar. Better they should be finished with the guy who was on the job when the tracks were created rather than say, Blondie or Waddy, right? Plus, what a great way to see if Taylor is up for a tour....:-)

the idea of finishing 40 years old later tracks to be realeased in a product that aims to be a celebration of THAT album in THAT time is ridicolous

a complete different thing would be to take those ideas and rework them now to be released as new in THIS time. This could be arguable but certainly more decent

Maybe Taylor finally got around to filing that royalties lawsuit

Quote
R

Quote
Marhsall
Leave them as they are and release them!!! That's the point of my 'overproduction' thread!

If this rumor is indeed true and knowing the way the Stones work, these tracks likely only have a single guitar. Better they should be finished with the guy who was on the job when the tracks were created rather than say, Blondie or Waddy, right? Plus, what a great way to see if Taylor is up for a tour....:-)

Absolutely! Its shocking to see how history-fixed some people here are. Unfinished stuff is for bootlegs! I dont wanna hear a track like Highway Child with only lead vocals, one guitar and drums on an official record! I have it in great quality on bootleg already! If the Stones have great ideas to finish this track with bass, keyboards, lead guitar, proper lyrics whatever else, they should do it! There may be other "bare naked" demos of this nature which otherwise would not be releasable at all. Would anyone here prefer them to stay in the vaults?

I once listened to Buddy Hollys Browneyed Handsome Man original demo compared to the well-known version that was completed with overdubs after his death. As interesting as the demo is, I still prefer the released version and dont care a shit if it was overdubbed after his death because its F***ING GOOD! And thats all what counts!

So y'all are OK with recording new guitar and vocal tracks on recordings that are basically 40 years old.

That is so uncool the only thing I can think of to tell all of you that are for that is that you suck.

Quote
liddas
I don't like the idea too much. It would be as if Mick and Keith had overdubbed NOW to the 40 years old unreleased recordings that were in the bonus disc on the new Ya Yas. Could Warried About You as released on Tattoo You be presented as a Black and Blue outtake? No way! The interest in having these new unrelesed traks (or bootlegs) is that you have the musical context in which Exile was born. These tracks have an historical value.

C

I agree. The undoctored tracks, no matter how rough and unfinished they might be, would still be preferable to tracks that have guitar parts recorded by a 27-year old Keith in 1971, guitar parts recorded by a 62-year-old MT in 2010, and vocals recorded by a 28-year-old Mick, and a SIXTY-SEVEN year old Mick, possibly IN THE SAME TRACK.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-01-26 16:59 by tatters.

Quote
tatters

Quote
liddas
I don't like the idea too much. It would be as if Mick and Keith had overdubbed NOW to the 40 years old unreleased recordings that were in the bonus disc on the new Ya Yas. Could Warried About You as released on Tattoo You be presented as a Black and Blue outtake? No way! The interest in having these new unrelesed traks (or bootlegs) is that you have the musical context in which Exile was born. These tracks have an historical value.

C

I agree. The undoctored tracks, no matter how rough and unfinished they might be, would still be preferable to tracks that have guitar parts recorded by a 27-year old Keith in 1971, guitar parts recorded by a 62-year-old MT in 2010, and vocals recorded by a 28-year-old Mick, and a SIXTY-SEVEN year old Mick, possibly IN THE SAME TRACK.

Well I wouldn't care, if the result would be great music. I prefer good music to so called historic material. We have enough of that. I'm not a purist but a lover of the best Stonesmusic possible.

Quote
tatters
I agree. The undoctored tracks, no matter how rough and unfinished they might be, would still be preferable to tracks that have guitar parts recorded by a 27-year old Keith in 1971, guitar parts recorded by a 62-year-old MT in 2010, and vocals recorded by a 28-year-old Mick, and a SIXTY-SEVEN year old Mick, possibly IN THE SAME TRACK.

Truth is that you would listen to these supposedly "preferable" undoctored tracks, "no matter how rough and unfinished they might be" once or twice to understand their "historical context" with an "oh, quite nice!"-remark and thats it.

Quote
tatters

Quote
liddas
I don't like the idea too much. It would be as if Mick and Keith had overdubbed NOW to the 40 years old unreleased recordings that were in the bonus disc on the new Ya Yas. Could Warried About You as released on Tattoo You be presented as a Black and Blue outtake? No way! The interest in having these new unrelesed traks (or bootlegs) is that you have the musical context in which Exile was born. These tracks have an historical value.

C

I agree. The undoctored tracks, no matter how rough and unfinished they might be, would still be preferable to tracks that have guitar parts recorded by a 27-year old Keith in 1971, and guitar parts that recorded by a 62-year-old MT in 2010, and vocals recorded by a 28-year-old Mick and a SIXTY-SEVEN year old Mick possibly appearing IN THE SAME TRACK.

No major record label is going to risk putting raw, badly mixed bootleg quality material out and trying to pass it off as "deluxe".

And it's not as if the original is being tampered with either. We're talking about embellishing the unfinished tracks for a bonus disk. I have some bootleg Exile outtakes which are just backing tracks. I'm not going to buy that, even if it is released officially!

It looks like a lot of energy has gone into this project and I think you either support it or the vaults stay shut for the foreseeable (as my guess is that it is a test of how much support there is for future archive releases) Sorry if I sound harsh.

the point here imo is not what they can or cannot do with their own material. of course they can do pretty much what they like to and if they want to finish '72 tracks 40 years later... well do it

for me it will be interesting if they do it for a new album... a la Tattoo You... but to put those "frankenstein" trax in a reissue project sounds as fake as it can be

Quote
alimente

Quote
tatters
I agree. The undoctored tracks, no matter how rough and unfinished they might be, would still be preferable to tracks that have guitar parts recorded by a 27-year old Keith in 1971, guitar parts recorded by a 62-year-old MT in 2010, and vocals recorded by a 28-year-old Mick, and a SIXTY-SEVEN year old Mick, possibly IN THE SAME TRACK.

Truth is that you would listen to these supposedly "preferable" undoctored tracks, "no matter how rough and unfinished they might be" once or twice to understand their "historical context" with an "oh, quite nice!"-remark and thats it.

How could anyone really like to listen to some tracks renewed and modified now being
originally recorded almost 40 years ago ?

That´ll be as ridiculous as the vocal ( and what else ) overdubs which had been made for
the Live At Leeds Deluxe Edition....

The whole point is it won't SOUND like it's from that era, it will sound like it's some desperate attempt to issue bonus material that should have been left alone and just released as is.

So what's that you say? Well if they were to go as far back as the Steel Wheels sessions leftovers and on through Bridges To Babylon for a new album, that's still less albums' worth of material than what was done for Tattoo You (that's 3 albums compared to Goats Head Soup, IORR, BAB, Some Girls and ER).

Time wise, yeah, way off the charts. But sound wise, ha ha, no. So no big deal. Age wise, not such a gap as recording new tracks on recordings from 1969, 1970, 1971 and 1972 in TWENTY TEN. Songs for Tattoo You were recorded by the band from 1972 to 1980. Overdubs were done into mid 1981.

That's considerably different than going back to recordings that were possibly last heard and dealt with in early 1972.

It worked with TY. And I don't see why adding some rhythm guitar and BU-vocals would change those tracks totally?

it is not a matter of time... for me they could also work now on a demo of '64. The point is that it will be ridicolous if released in a reissue of Now! While it would or would not make sense as a new release.

In fact I have wondered many times why they are not more prolific in terms of releases by taking advanteges of the vaults precisely in that way. Those "songs" are their own ideas and why not use them instead of striving for "new" ones

Thing is we discuss this this without having listened to the tracks in question. Its all based on theory - "no, its simply impossible that it sounds right!" - all I say is that IF THEY SOUND RIGHT, ITS ALL THAT MATTERS.

Quote
alimente
Thing is we discuss this this without having listened to the tracks in question. Its all based on theory - "no, its simply impossible that it sounds right!" - all I say is that IF THEY SOUND RIGHT, ITS ALL THAT MATTERS.

Correct,alimentre,pure speculation so far....but if...it would be a disappointment for me at least.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
It worked with TY. And I don't see why adding some rhythm guitar and BU-vocals would change those tracks totally?

Most of the songs on Tattoo You were two or three years old. Bit of a difference. And most of what was added were the vocals. Jagger's voice hadnt exactly changed much in 3 years in his mid 30s.

Only a couple of the songs were more than 6 years old and none older than 8-9.

If the Stones did a new album now and used leftovers from their last 2 recording sessions - 40 Licks and ABB - it would be much the same thing (in fact, it would be even older as ABB is already five years old)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-01-26 17:47 by Gazza.

If true, sounds like MJ is playing a hedge.

Now he has two potentially solid guitarists battling against each other for the spot on the next tour, the one who cleans himself up wins, but in reality they both win if they each clean themselves up as they can then become more productive in life, and in the music they make.

If he's doing that for MT, giving him a shot at something Stones related, in my opinion that would be a very kind gesture. Hopefully he's also giving him a piece of the pie, even a small slice would probably be helpful to him.

If it's just a few guitar parts based on stuff already done, I don't really mind. A few backing vocals might be ok, but please...no brand new lead vocals....U2 did this with a very small number of unreleased songs from the 80's just a couple of years ago. Hearing Bono's aged vocals from 2008 on a 1983 U2 song (when he was 22-23) just didn't work. I didn't mind a little extra guitar (or even all new guitar) as that can be done to sound fairly close to the original sound. If this is the only way to get an unfinished song released, then go for it...(except for all new vocals that is)

iwould like ANYTHING but would prefer the unfinished songs that are not on bootlegs as they are for us to listen to .
THEN re record everything with the 72 line-up as well. mick taylor doesnt play now as he did (plectrum as opposed to fingers ) and neither does keith...better all new recOrdings and then a tour ,
im starting saving right now!

All new vocals would help make it sound NEW...Plus a great song is a great song weather it was made 100 years ago or yesterday.
I do think they could remake any song to sound new but they need to either redo all the vocals..Would sound a bit off if you have one track with Mick Jagger of today and another back when he 1st recorded Exile.

Well, it would only take lot of archives, Mick, a producer and some add musicians a'la Taylor, and we could get TATTOO YOU vol.2 easily...

But I hope that Mick's perfectionism do not go too far with the EXILE out-takes... no any "Free As A Bird" kind of things...

But of course, from the early 70's there are songs on the vaults that would easily outshine anything they had done since 1989. But then again, if they would do a TATTOO YOU type of album of the vaults stuff since, say, VOODOO LOUNGE, and they really put a similar concentration and cohesion into it as they did to TATTOO YOU, that would probably outshine any of the recent albums, too. The EMOTIONAL RESCUE-TATTOO YOU-UNDERCOVER-sequence is a good reminder and even testimony that perhaps the best way to make a stunning Stones album does not come from the idea of Mick and Keith starting from the zero.

Even the great EXILE was a kind of proto-TATTOO YOU... many of the songs were left-overs from LET IT BLEED and STICKY FINGERS.

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2010-01-26 19:33 by Doxa.

Quote
skipstone
So y'all are OK with recording new guitar and vocal tracks on recordings that are basically 40 years old.

That is so uncool the only thing I can think of to tell all of you that are for that is that you suck.

If you truly believe that overdubbing of old recordings is wrong then your comment is best directed to those who are making the decision, assuming it's true, to do this.

I think the responses here are off track. THE news here is if Jagger called Taylor into the studio. IF true, it warms my heart. Not for the musical product that comes of it (although that is intriguing), not for a potential tour (although THAT is intriguing as well), but for Taylor's peace of mind after all these years.

Jagger's relationship with Taylor is fascinating for what little is written about it. They were collaborators in the studio. You often see them traveling together in a car. Clearly, Jagger was tuned in to what Taylor did on stage. He constantly cued, encouraged, prodded and approved of Taylor's playing. When Jagger said "play," Taylor played. There is no doubt in my mind that Jagger was proud to have Taylor as the band's lead guitarist. If Jagger had any aspirations that the band's music could be considered high art, those aspirations were linked to Taylor's playing. Just as Keith and Jagger validated each others' contributions, Taylor validated the final product. To me it is thrilling to watch Taylor with his guitar walk on stage with the band. The band charismatic? Yes. Exciting? Yes. But Taylor added a level of sophistication and beauty. He was musical quality assurance.

But by all accounts Jagger has been cool to Taylor (at best) since he quit. He is certainly tight lipped about Taylor and why he left.

One can imagine what a burden it has been for Taylor since he left the band, a burden he has had to carry for 35 years. All the questions, all the reminders, what is and what was. Assuming this information is true, I am happy for Taylor if working with his old colleague brings him some peace of mind and some recognition and appreciation of his talent. Who knows? Maybe in some measure that is why he quit.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
DandelionPowderman
It worked with TY. And I don't see why adding some rhythm guitar and BU-vocals would change those tracks totally?

Most of the songs on Tattoo You were two or three years old. Bit of a difference. And most of what was added were the vocals. Jagger's voice hadnt exactly changed much in 3 years in his mid 30s.

Only a couple of the songs were more than 6 years old and none older than 8-9.

If the Stones did a new album now and used leftovers from their last 2 recording sessions - 40 Licks and ABB - it would be much the same thing (in fact, it would be even older as ABB is already five years old)

Gazza, this could be re-phrased - at least two of the songs were 8 or 9 years old (Tops and Worried?) and otheres were at least 5-6 years old - Slave, SMU.

You take them out of TY and you have basically a SG out-takes album - Sucking in the 70s Part 2



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-01-26 20:16 by Deluxtone.

Most of the album contained overdubs on recordings that were no more than 3-4 years old. The guts of the album came from Some Girls and Emotional Rescue sessions.

Start Me Up may date from 1975, but the version that was worked on for Tattoo You came from a Some Girls session, I think. Similarly, Worried About You and Slave had work done to them in 1979.

Songs often take several years to evolve, thats certainly true - but thats not quite the same thing.

Quote
pmk251
I think the responses here are off track. THE news here is if Jagger called Taylor into the studio. IF true, it warms my heart. Not for the musical product that comes of it (although that is intriguing), not for a potential tour (although THAT is intriguing as well), but for Taylor's peace of mind after all these years.

Jagger's relationship with Taylor is fascinating for what little is written about it. They were collaborators in the studio. You often see them traveling together in a car. Clearly, Jagger was tuned in to what Taylor did on stage. He constantly cued, encouraged, prodded and approved of Taylor's playing. When Jagger said "play," Taylor played. There is no doubt in my mind that Jagger was proud to have Taylor as the band's lead guitarist. If Jagger had any aspirations that the band's music could be considered high art, those aspirations were linked to Taylor's playing. Just as Keith and Jagger validated each others' contributions, Taylor validated the final product. To me it is thrilling to watch Taylor with his guitar walk on stage with the band. The band charismatic? Yes. Exciting? Yes. But Taylor added a level of sophistication and beauty. He was musical quality assurance.

But by all accounts Jagger has been cool to Taylor (at best) since he quit. He is certainly tight lipped about Taylor and why he left.

One can imagine what a burden it has been for Taylor since he left the band, a burden he has had to carry for 35 years. All the questions, all the reminders, what is and what was. Assuming this information is true, I am happy for Taylor if working with his old colleague brings him some peace of mind and some recognition and appreciation of his talent. Who knows? Maybe in some measure that is why he quit.

I don't know who you are, pmk251, but you have understood what zillions of blind stones-fans have never understood, and will never understand.

Your post is great.

Let the Stones music shine on you !

It's such a bizarre concept. If it's true, the Stones must really believe they are beyond such constraints as the effects of time.

Why not have Mick and Anita add some additional footage to Performance then? What a shocker that would be.

However, if it is true, at least it means recognition for Mick Taylor in every sense.