^ Sounds like a great group effort to me. Everyone doing ace things.

We get very pedantic on here about Brian's songwriting, or flaws (which don't matter a shit to me) but the basic thing one cannot deny is that Brian's touch added something that was not there later. If you like them post Brian better, that's fine, but to take away what he did do musically is very wrong and has been the name of the game for years. My two cents is that Andrew had it out for Brian much more than Mick or Keith. I think that's overlooked as far as Brian's place in the band, the contracts with publishers, or the publicity behind Mick and Keith.

One thing we know for sure from countless people is that Mick and Keith aren't that kind about sharing credit. From 1965 on after the Nanker Phelge credits stopped, there is likely many songs that deserved that credit. I think the bottom line is that Mick and Keith aren't going to open themselves up to any sort of legal ramification that would entail Brian's estate or family to royalties. I think more than anything (other than maybe guilt) that's why Brian is given so little credit. Same reason Bill and Taylor (even Wood at times) doesn't get there songwriting fully recognized. Do you realize how much money they would owe in damages if it they lost a suit? They wouldn't be close to hurting, but it would make them look bad and be a long tedious process unless they chose to settle.

Mick giving Brian his due in early 1967 let's us know clearly that Brian was musically essential to the songs in one way or another at least through that time. Satanic is obviously very much something Brian was important to, even if he didn't like some or all of it. After that there is much debate, and I feel after May 1968 Brian just lost all desire to be a Rolling Stone. That obviously caused a lot of problems, but I think it's understandable. Brian Jones was no saint, but his darkest moments aren't what matters today. It's the music and I will always love his work.

Quote
straycatblues73

Quote
2000 LYFH
You can hear him here! Almost sounds like he should have had a song writing credit on this one too...

sorry , but keith steals the show here with his guitar picking.

How can one "hear" if anyone deserves a song writing credit?

Quote
mikeeder
We get very pedantic on here about Brian's songwriting, or flaws (which don't matter a shit to me) but the basic thing one cannot deny is that Brian's touch added something that was not there later. If you like them post Brian better, that's fine, but to take away what he did do musically is very wrong and has been the name of the game for years. My two cents is that Andrew had it out for Brian much more than Mick or Keith. I think that's overlooked as far as Brian's place in the band, the contracts with publishers, or the publicity behind Mick and Keith.

One thing we know for sure from countless people is that Mick and Keith aren't that kind about sharing credit. From 1965 on after the Nanker Phelge credits stopped, there is likely many songs that deserved that credit. I think the bottom line is that Mick and Keith aren't going to open themselves up to any sort of legal ramification that would entail Brian's estate or family to royalties. I think more than anything (other than maybe guilt) that's why Brian is given so little credit. Same reason Bill and Taylor (even Wood at times) doesn't get there songwriting fully recognized. Do you realize how much money they would owe in damages if it they lost a suit? They wouldn't be close to hurting, but it would make them look bad and be a long tedious process unless they chose to settle.

Mick giving Brian his due in early 1967 let's us know clearly that Brian was musically essential to the songs in one way or another at least through that time. Satanic is obviously very much something Brian was important to, even if he didn't like some or all of it. After that there is much debate, and I feel after May 1968 Brian just lost all desire to be a Rolling Stone. That obviously caused a lot of problems, but I think it's understandable. Brian Jones was no saint, but his darkest moments aren't what matters today. It's the music and I will always love his work.

Nicky Hopkins was just as useful as Brian was for certain songs.

Nicky makes Angie in lots of ways.

Does Nicky deserve a songwriting credit for Angie.

No, he doesn't because he is only really enhancing what is already there, ie the song.

We have no evidence that Brian actually created structural parts of the Stones songs at the ground level.

We do have evidence of Brian being an enhancer of what is already there, just like Nicky Hopkins.

No one says the Paint It Black riff is Brian's and that riff is also part of the verse melody and therefore would earn a songwriting credit.

Brian's Last Time riff is not part of the songs melody.

Theoretically, the Last Time can exist as a song without Brian's riff (even though Mick and Keith ripped off the Chorus).

Brian's Last Time riff is based on Keith's verse chord movement and Brian did a good job, but Keith and Mick's verse has to be there before Brian can do anything.

We have no evidence that Brian could write or co-write a commercial song which is a lot different thing to playing riffs or enhancing something.

Credit for riffs and other bits are a bit of a grey area.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-11 14:33 by howled.

<Brian's Last Time riff is based on Keith's verse chord movement and Brian did a good job>

That is interesting, and true as well. However, the riff is very distinct and recognisable, so it shines through. If Brian had that riff, and played it for Mick and Keith, and the latter made a song out of it - it would be different, imo.

The Satisfaction riff is not the Satisfaction song.

The Satisfaction riff melody is not used in the verse and chorus of the song, like the way the Paint It Black riff is used for the verse melody for instance.

The Satisfaction (Nowhere To Run) riff might have inspired the Satisfaction song but theoretically it's not the song.

Is a riff part of the accompaniment or a melody that can be copyrighted or included in the song's copyright.

I don't know, it's all a bit grey to me.

All I know is that the best way to get a songwriting credit is to have something to do with the verse and/or chorus melody and words.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-11 15:31 by howled.

Quote
howled
The Satisfaction riff is not the Satisfaction song.

The Satisfaction riff melody is not used in the verse and chorus of the song, like the way the Paint It Black riff is used for the verse melody for instance.

The Satisfaction (Nowhere To Run) riff might have inspired the Satisfaction song but theoretically it's not the song.

Is a riff part of the accompaniment or a melody that can be copyrighted or included in the song's copyright.

I don't know, it's all a bit grey to me.

All I know is that the best way to get a songwriting credit is to have something to do with the verse and/or chorus melody and words.

Well yes a lot of this does fall into grey areas.

If someone (say Brian) changed one word in a song and Mick agreed, would he get a credit? Lets say the song was "Paint it White" and Brian said, No Mick change it to "Paint it Black" - then what should the credits read?

Lets say Brian was the one that wrote the beginning Satisfaction riff and nothing else, then what should the credits read?

If a Stones song was 2:30 in length and Brian said, I want to add this little piece in the middle which extended it to 3:00, then what? The song could work at 2:30 or 3:00 in length, but the 3:00 version is what got released.

Guess who got a song writing credit on Moby Dick by Zeppelin. Yes Bonzo for his drum solo. I don't know if that has anything to do with the Page/Jones riff (which may have been taken from someone else but that's a different story).

<If a Stones song was 2:30 in length and Brian said, I want to add this little piece in the middle which extended it to 3:00, then what? The song could work at 2:30 or 3:00 in length, but the 3:00 version is what got released.

Guess who got a song writing credit on Moby Dick by Zeppelin. Yes Bonzo for his drum solo.>

In both cases, Brian and Bonzo rightfully earned their writing credits, imo.

And, when a riff IS the song, like with Satisfaction, we're not in a grey area anymore. Think of it this way: which parts are we humming, when we hum Satisfaction?

"I can't get no - da, da, da - da, da, da, da..."

Quote
DandelionPowderman
<If a Stones song was 2:30 in length and Brian said, I want to add this little piece in the middle which extended it to 3:00, then what? The song could work at 2:30 or 3:00 in length, but the 3:00 version is what got released.

Guess who got a song writing credit on Moby Dick by Zeppelin. Yes Bonzo for his drum solo.>

In both cases, Brian and Bonzo rightfully earned their writing credits, imo.

And, when a riff IS the song, like with Satisfaction, we're not in a grey area anymore. Think of it this way: which parts are we humming, when we hum Satisfaction?

"I can't get no - da, da, da - da, da, da, da..."

Er, didn't Keith write the 'Satisfaction' riff and song?

Quote
nightskyman

Quote
DandelionPowderman
<If a Stones song was 2:30 in length and Brian said, I want to add this little piece in the middle which extended it to 3:00, then what? The song could work at 2:30 or 3:00 in length, but the 3:00 version is what got released.

Guess who got a song writing credit on Moby Dick by Zeppelin. Yes Bonzo for his drum solo.>

In both cases, Brian and Bonzo rightfully earned their writing credits, imo.

And, when a riff IS the song, like with Satisfaction, we're not in a grey area anymore. Think of it this way: which parts are we humming, when we hum Satisfaction?

"I can't get no - da, da, da - da, da, da, da..."

Er, didn't Keith write the 'Satisfaction' riff and song?

He sure did. It was just an example of a riff being so vital for the song that it would be ridiculous not to earn a credit for writing it.

Quote
howled


Brian's Last Time riff is based on Keith's verse chord movement and Brian did a good job, but Keith and Mick's verse has to be there before Brian can do anything.

How do you know that they didn't write the verse chords and verse melody to Brian's riff?

We have some evidence that Brian possibly kick started what became Ruby Tuesday.

This strive for evidence should work both ways though and there isn't actually that much evidence to tell us how most of The Rolling Stones songs and music was actually created and who wrote what.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-11 22:51 by His Majesty.

The Brian Jones songwriting debate has been going on for some time now. It's currently going on right now on some Brian Jones Facebook page.

Personally, I think if Andrew Oldham received co-songwriting credit for "As Tears Go By" because he changed the lyric from "As 'Time' Goes By" to "As 'Tears' Go By" and came up with the idea to add strings to the song, than Brian probably could have received co-songwriting credit on a few Stones' songs based on what he contributed musically. But we are getting into a grey area here. I always felt as though Brian didn't conceive many songs at all, he added colors into songs that were already written - which he was amazing at. We also don't know exactly what the law is regarding songwriting credit.

When I think of songwriting, regarding Brian, I want to know if he could actually write music and lyrics, which His Majesty mentioned in one of his posts? I'm not talking about writing the soundtrack for A Degree Of Murder, which is basically all instrumental music, or this instrumental song which has appeared on bootlegs called "Dust My Pyramid". Could he actually write lyrics and a melody - conceive a song from the ground up. I'm sure he wrote some songs or parts of songs, but unfortunately we know very little other than what Mick, Keith, Andrew Oldham and a few others have said. According to Mick, Keith, Andrew and a few others Brian simply didn't have talent for writing songs, and that he would only show people parts of songs he wrote. I know over on some BJ message boards and some Facebook pages, they try to make him out to be the second coming to Bob Dylan or Paul McCartney as a songwriter. People have a tendency of pointing out the poem which he allegedly wrote, "Thank You For Being There", that appeared in Mandy Aftel's book as proof that he had songwriting talent (whether Brian meant it as a song or just a poem is anyone's guess). Maybe this isn't fair to say, but if that poem/song was any kind of evidence of his 'songwriting' talent I can't see the Stones' wanting to record his material. Lets also keep in mind that even if he did show the Stones' some of his songs and the band didn't want to record them he did have other options, like giving them to other artists to record. Yet no Brian Jones song has ever surfaced on record. I'm sure back in the Sixties some up-and-coming female artist wouldn't have thought twice about recording a song by Brian. After all, this is what Bill Wyman did when the band wasn't interested in recording any of his songs. As Brian being a songwriter, I think for most part it's just grasping at straws.

Sorry for the long post.

Rob

Your point about Andrew's credit is a good one and it shows that song writing credits is about business and who has control of the business calls the shots.

Back to the music side of things...

Brian could write melodies as evidenced by his A Degree Of Murder soundtrack, thus he could in theory be part of the writing songs. His soundtrack being all instrumental matters not, all songs are instrumental until they get lyrics.

A musician need only contribute part of a melody to justifiably be entitled to a song writing credit whether that's suggesting something which inspires a song and is kept part of it in some form or suggesting something to someone else's work in progress which makes it to the finished piece.

Bear in mind that many song writing teams consist of someone who only does the music and someone who only does the lyrics. There's many ways for songs to get written.

Brian clearly had confidence issues about this stuff, but yet he still managed to write and produce the A Degree Of Murder soundtrack complete with chord structures, melodies and groovy arrangements.

Brian did have the musical ability to be part of the creation of songs. Whether he did in the context of The Rolling Stones is something we just don't know.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-12 02:13 by His Majesty.

Deleted.

Quote
His Majesty
Your point about Andrew's credit is a good one and it shows that song writing credits is about business and who has control of the business calls the shots.

Back to the music side of things...

Brian could write melodies as evidenced by his A Degree Of Murder soundtrack, thus he could be part of the writing songs. His soundtrack being all instrumental matters not, all songs are instrumental until they get lyrics.

A musician need only contribute part of a melody to justifiably be entitled to song writing credit whether that's suggesting something which inspires a song and is kept as part of it in some form or suggesting something to someone else's work in progress song which makes it to the finished piece.

Brian could write melodies and could certainly contribute great things arrangement wise.

Bear in mind that many song writing teams consist of someone who only does the music and someone who only does the lyrics. There's many ways for songs to get written.

A lot of silly jones fans get all nuts about Brian as if he was the messiah or something, ignore that crap, they are fookin' loonies with no clue!

...

Brian did have the musical ability to be part of the creation of songs. Whether he did in the context of The Rolling Stones is something we just don't know.

His Majesty, I understand what you're saying completely. I know songs on the soundtrack for A Degree Of Murder had melodies. I'm just pointing out whether he was a complete songwriter meaning melody/lyrics. Like I pointed out that his strong point is what he contributed musically.

Rob



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-12 02:09 by stones1962.

Quote
stones1962


His Majesty, I understand what you're saying completely. I know songs on the soundtrack for A Degree Of Murder had melodies. I'm just pointing out whether he was a complete songwriter meaning melody/lyrics. Like I pointed out that his strong point is what he contributed musically.

Rob

We the general public have no audible proof that he was a song writer on his own, someone who was able to combine all the elements of song writing and write a complete song. That being chord structures, melodies and lyrics.

We do have audible evidence to show he could write chord structures and melodies.






Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-12 02:31 by His Majesty.

Quote
His Majesty
Your point about Andrew's credit is a good one and it shows that song writing credits is about business and who has control of the business calls the shots.

Back to the music side of things...

Brian could write melodies as evidenced by his A Degree Of Murder soundtrack, thus he could in theory be part of the writing songs. His soundtrack being all instrumental matters not, all songs are instrumental until they get lyrics.

A musician need only contribute part of a melody to justifiably be entitled to a song writing credit whether that's suggesting something which inspires a song and is kept part of it in some form or suggesting something to someone else's work in progress which makes it to the finished piece.

Bear in mind that many song writing teams consist of someone who only does the music and someone who only does the lyrics. There's many ways for songs to get written.

Brian clearly had confidence issues about this stuff, but yet he still managed to write and produce the A Degree Of Murder soundtrack complete with chord structures, melodies and groovy arrangements.

Brian did have the musical ability to be part of the creation of songs. Whether he did in the context of The Rolling Stones is something we just don't know.

If Andrew changed some words in a song and it was accepted by the other writers etc, then he's entitled to go on the credits.

Maybe, Brian had confidence issues because he may have thought that his songs were not very good and maybe they were not very good.

If Andrew did change the title from "As Time Goes By" to "As Tears Go By" then it might have been because Keith and Mick might have used the old song from Casablanca as a temporary title and changing it afterwards is probably a good idea.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-12 07:59 by howled.

R.E.M. made the wisest decision in my opinion: share songwriting credits equally for every song. That way every member could contribute as little or as much as they felt needed but they all benefitted equally.

(Trivia: drummer Bill Berry wrote some of their best songs, e.g., "Perfect Circle" & "Driver 8".)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-12 08:03 by Glam Descendant.

Just don't enjoy the oldies (Paint it Black, Ruby Tuesday & more) as much without Brian's musical contributions....

Brian isn't entitled to a credit for the riff on The Last Time. Nicky isn't entitled a credit for his amazing addings on We Love You. But Mick is, for some weird reason, entitled a credit for Ruby Tuesday although he claim he had nothing to do with the making of it.

Why not see that the "grey areas" of songwriting in the case of Jagger/Richards or Lennon/McCartney has got more to do with buisness than the reality of who wrote what?

Quote
His Majesty
A musician need only contribute part of a melody to justifiably be entitled to a song writing credit whether that's suggesting something which inspires a song and is kept part of it in some form or suggesting something to someone else's work in progress which makes it to the finished piece.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-12 09:54 by tonterapi.

Quote
howled


If Andrew changed some words in a song and it was accepted by the other writers etc, then he's entitled to go on the credits.

If Andrew did change the title from "As Time Goes By" to "As Tears Go By" then it might have been because Keith and Mick might have used the old song from Casablanca as a temporary title and changing it afterwards is probably a good idea.

Nanker Phelge credit implies they all contributed to those songs, thus there is your proof that Brian could be part of the writing of songs.

"accepted by the other writers", indeed, whether or not the main writers accept to credit someone else for an idea they use. Which is ridiculous.

I think it is silly to believe that the others simply stopped adding ideas after circa 1965 and the arrival of Allen Klein which is when Nanker Phelge stops appearing on song credits.

Business business business.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-12 10:01 by His Majesty.

Yes, that's right.

The legal songwriting credits were possibly set up in a certain way.

But, if a song is coming from Paul McCartney and the next song is coming from John Lennon and the next song is a collaboration between John and Paul then it can be not worth the hassle to change the credits, especially when they were set in the early days when John and Paul collaborated on a lot of songs.

If George Harrison had a big influence on a Beatles song then the credits might be changed to Lennon/McCartney/Harrison or just Harrison.

The Stones case is the same as the Beatles case with Brian being in George's position.

George wrote some songs and got credit for them when they were recorded by the Beatles.

Brian wrote no songs that we know of that were recorded by the Stones.

Keith can write a pop ballad.

In fact, pop ballads are one of Keith's strong points believe it or not, going back to "As Tears Go By".

Keith takes credit for Ruby Tuesday which is a pop ballad with a pop chorus.

Keith is the one that has a track record writing pop ballads and not Brian.

Just because Brian's recorder is on Ruby Tuesday does not necessarily mean he had anything to do with writing it, just as Nicky Hopkins didn't write Angie which is another Keith pop ballad.

Ruby Tuesday is basically a piano song and not a recorder song.

Who knows, Keith might have heard Brian play something on the recorder, but don't forget that Keith had the ability to turn things around into pop melodies and songs and the recorder thing might inspire it but not create it.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-12 10:13 by howled.

Quote
howled
But, if a song is coming from Paul McCartney and the next song is coming from John Lennon and the next song is a collaboration between John and Paul then it can be not worth the hassle to change the credits especially when they were set in the early days when John and Paul collaborated on a lot of songs.

I think what you wrote here fits Mick's earlier quote.

"Reporter: Who is the author of your songs?
Mick: No one of us in particular, and all of us at the same time. We usually sign Jagger and Richards, but Brian is the one that knows music best and, in short, one cannot be distinguished by the other. We are all necessary."

It was easier for buisness sake to leave out those who actually deserved a credit on a few songs as most material was written by two members.

Do we think Jagger & Richards would step right up & give Brian credit where it's due in cases where the general public doesn't know the better and the only ones that do are them?

All of this Brian credit stuff really has no meaning from 1968 onwards anyway.

If someone thinks that Brian had something to do with the writing of "Street Fighting Man" just because he played a bit of Sitar on it, well, whatever.

The main Brian credit things are the ones where he is featured playing some weird instrument in a pretty basic way, which was mainly the psychedelic flower period where world music was a bit of the go for a while and we ended up with Sitars and who knows what in pop songs.

There are also a few earlier riffs, like The Last Time and Get Off My Cloud.

Brian could hop on an instrument and play it in a basic way.

Brian's Sax playing on the Beatles tune is pretty basic and a bit ropey according to Paul but it fit the throwaway track so they left it in.

Brian knew music theory, probably from Clarinet lessons, maybe, and the other Stones wouldn't have known much theory I don't think.

Music theory comes in useful for some arranging and things like that.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-12 11:22 by howled.

Quote
owlbynite
Do we think Jagger & Richards would step right up & give Brian credit where it's due in cases where the general public doesn't know the better and the only ones that do are them?

Well if it were up to Jagger/Richards then no, but why would it be up to them if Brian did write part of the finished product?

Needless to say, Brian was every bit a member as "them" and if he did co-author part of a song, why didn't he put his name on it?

The part I don't understand is how are the songwriting credits issued from the studio to the publisher/record company? What exactly is the process and how is it that Brian and Bill were not in the loop? They had just as much right to have their name on the credits as anyone else!

The Jagger/Richards agreement is fine as long as they are the only two involved, but once there are other writers, then that agreement goes away, IMHO...

If someone has something that alters the structure of the song, then they should get a credit.

Especially any contribution to the melody/lyrics of the song.

If someone plays a great intro to a song or a solo on a song or a riff on a song or some backing enhancements or whatever, then they don't necessarily get on the credits.

Sometimes they might get on the credits due to group credits, but it depends on the band and how it's set up.

No one seems to have any evidence of Brian or Bill actually contributing to a Stones song's melody and/or lyrics except for Bill's Another Land or whatever.

Where is Brian's "In Another Land" btw.

If Bill got the ok to do it then Brian should have got the ok, if he had a song or part of a song ready for the Stones.

Bits of music that might end up in a film soundtrack or whatever, are not necessarily what the Stones can use.

Keith talks about writing for the Stones.

Keith has written things that might not be suitable for the Stones.

Angus and Mal, no doubt write some things that can't really be used for AC/DC, I seem to remember Angus talking about this in an interview.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-12 16:37 by howled.

Quote
howled
The main Brian credit things are the ones where he is featured playing some weird instrument in a pretty basic way, which was mainly the psychedelic flower period where world music was a bit of the go for a while and we ended up with Sitars and who knows what in pop songs.

Brian could hop on an instrument and play it in a basic way.

I don't know why you you want to point out that he played the instruments in a very "basic" way when many of his addings shows that he was a very innovative and experimental musician. I'm not saying he was a virtuoso or genius. But he had a great ear and knew what to do with a song to give it something special and it always fit. He wasn't just a dabbler. Just listen to his mellotron addings or his use of the dulcimer.

It's true that he sometimes kept it simple though. Simple and effective. The sitar on Paint it Black is a good example. It's also true that he wasn't wunderkind on wind instruments but it still gave the songs a nice aura. Ruby Tuesday and Child of the Moon really benefit from Brian's addings IMHO.

Quote
howled
No one seems to have any evidence of Brian or Bill actually contributing to a Stones song's melody and/or lyrics except for Bill's Another Land or whatever.

Where is Brian's "In Another Land" btw.

If Bill got the ok to do it then Brian should have got the ok, if he had a song or part of a song ready for the Stones.

Bits of music that might end up in a film soundtrack or whatever, are not necessarily what the Stones can use.

Keith talks about writing for the Stones.

Keith has written things that might not be suitable for the Stones.

Since credits always went to Jagger/Richards regardless of who did what it's impossible to have evidence. That's what Andrew wanted and that's what the glimmers became so protective about.
The thing is that I have a hard time to believe that the Nanker thing ended just because Andrew wanted the band to have their own Lennon/McCartney team. Brian had musical ideas and could come up with melodies and chord sequences - again we only have his soundtrack as proof. But we can assume that he also had ideas for the Nanker things. If not then why have a band credit if not everyone was involved?

I don't think Brian showed the others whole songs that he had written. But I do believe that he showed them "bits and pieces" since those were the words Keith used when he talked about Brian's songs. Brian was a very insecure guy and with all that had happend in the band I guess it was tough as hell for him to get the strength needed to show his song efforts for the others. That was his problem of course.
Bill had more confidence and had already recorded In Another Land with others when he showed it to Mick and Keith AFAIK. Brian could have done something similar. But I don't think he had the confidence to ask Mick and Keith to put it on a Stones album. Satanic would have been a great album for him to do so since it was so far out. I think that was why Bill was allowed to do it.

I agree that songs written should fit the overall band sound. But I'm not so sure that Mick and Keith knew what that sound was themselves in the 60's as they experimented a lot with different styles.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-12 17:10 by tonterapi.

Songwriting is a specific talent, as much as writing a play is totally different from writing a work of fiction. I don't see Brian having the stick-to-it that songwriting requires. From what I understand, some of the songs come tumbling out full formed, but not always. If Brian had survived, and matured, he might have taken another crack at it. It wouldn't have hurt to have had a trusted partner, but that doesn't seem to be something Brian could handle.

In the end Brian, musically, Brian might be seen as their ultimate sideman, guiding them through the very experimental, very eclectic pop landscape of the mid-60s. Of course he was much more than that on a visual and intellectual level, but musically he never bore down very long in one direction.

Q & A

Could Brian write music with chord structures and melodies?

Yes, the A Degree Of Murder soundtrack is proof of this.



Did this ability for writing music manifest itself in the music of The Rolling Stones?

Yes. That being in the form of The Rolling Stones songs with a Nanker Phelge song writing credit and the many contributions he made to the arrangements as heard on The Rolling Stones recordings.



Did Brian write or try to write songs?

Yes. Keith Richards, Andrew Loog Oldham, Linda Lawrence, Anita Pallenberg amongst others have all talked about Brian writing or trying to write songs.



Why are there no Brian Jones songs available for us to hear?

Simply because the demo recordings have never been made available to the general public and/or have been destroyed. Andrew Oldham has talked of a 1964 demo recording of a song or songs by Brian and Gene Pitney. Andrew deemed them to be "unlistenable".

Brian himself said this in 12th February 1966 edition of Record Mirror.
"I am not personally insecure, just unsure. I would like to write, but I lack confidence."

Anita Pallenberg has mentioned that Brian would destroy recordings of songs he wrote or tried to write. The infamous "phantom" songs.

Keith Altham mentions Brian playing him some home recordings by Brian and Keith at No.1 Courtfield Road in October 1966. To quote Altham "He seemed enthusiastic, but embarrassed by his efforts".

In a spring 1969 edition of Eye Magazine, Bill talks of Mick asking him circa beginning of Beggars Banquet sessions if he had any songs. He said he did and also that Brian had one, but that when it came to the recording sessions it was the usual thing of work starting on a Mick and Keith song, then another, then another, "same old thing".

James Karnbach claims to own some Brian Jones demo recordings from 1969.

...



Summary: As with all things Brian it's not straightforward, there's an apparent contradiction between him being part of the Nanker Phelge song writing credits and the 1966 Record Mirror quote. There's a contradiction between his supposed inability to write music as claimed by Ian Stewart and the existence of Brian's 1967 soundtrack for the A Degree Of Murder film.

Essentially, Brian could write music, but had confidence issues. Despite these confidence issues he was part of the song writing for Nanker Phelge credited music by The Rolling Stones and he wrote the soundtrack for the film A Degree Of Murder.

Whether Brian contributed to the writing of songs which do not include him as part of the song writing credit is something we just do not know.





Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-12 18:05 by His Majesty.