Comments, input and alterations are very welcome!
________________________________________________________________________________

Have You Seen Your Mother, Baby, Standing In The Shadow?
(Mick Jagger / Keith Richards)

RCA Studios, Hollywood, Los Angeles, California, US, August 3 - 11, 1966,
IBC Studios, London, UK, August 31 - September 2, 1966 and
RCA Studios, Hollywood, Los Angeles, California, US, September 7 - 9, 1966

Mick Jagger - lead vocals, backing vocals
Keith Richards - acoustic guitar, electric guitar, bass, piano, backing vocals
Charlie Watts - drums
Jack Nitzsche - piano, tambourine
Mike Leander Orchestra - horns

Have you seen your mother, baby, standing in the shadow?
Have you had another, baby, standing in the shadow?
I'm glad I opened your eyes
The have-nots would have tried to freeze you in ice

Have you seen your brother, baby, standing in the shadow?
Have you had another, baby, standing in the shadow?
Well, I was just passing the time
I'm all alone, won't you give all your sympathy to mine?

Tell me a story about how you adore me
And we live in the shadow and we see through the shadow
How we live through the shadow and we tear for the shadow
How we hate in the shadow and we love in your shadowy life

I said: have you seen your lover, baby, standing in the shadow?
Has he had another, baby, standing in the shadow?
Just where have you been all your life?
Talking about all the people who would try anything twice, oh

Have you seen your mother, baby, standing in the shadow?
Have she had another, baby, standing in the shadow?
Well, you take your choice at this time
The brave old world or the slide to the depths of decline, of decline, oh

Produced by Andrew Loog Oldham

First released on:
The Rolling Stones -
“Have You Seen Your Mother, Baby, Standing In The Shadow? /
Who’s Driving Your Plane?” 7” single
(Decca F 12497) UK, September 23, 1966



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2012-07-11 18:23 by René.

A perfect example of the energy the band had in the mid 60s.
And it came way before "I can see for miles", let alone "Helter Skelter".

Here's Mick from Webster Hall, trying to give the song a come back.
I would not mind to see them playing this one on stage some time again.

Good one, should be used as opener for every rock-event.

2 1 2 0

I never liked it, I would always cringe when it came on. Too much treble and distortion. The strings and brass don't fit. Terrible singing.

freakin brilliant!
great songwriting + that highly buzzed mid-60s execution = hail hail Rolling Stones

in his book 2Stoned ALO tells an amusing story about the intro - they realized too late that it was "under-recorded"
so Mick, Keith and ALO wound up bolstering the sound with their own voices
so i guess the studio line-up should include those three on "backing nasal drone" :E



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-11-29 17:30 by with sssoul.

I remember that I heard this song the first time, I was stunned that it was possible to make so much noise especially when you hear the song the first time..........I really love this song.

By the way was this the first song ever that was so loud and full

__________________________

It really rocks...I loved because of the noise...Play it loud and piss off your parents & neighbours..
I just never really understood what it means!! ha..But i LOVED it...Its what makes the Stones the best of the best!

there's a fine song under all that noise, very melodic.

My favourite Stones song after Satisfaction.

A dizzying piece of visceral, existentialist punked up pop that set the Stones apart from just about every group working in the pop realm at that time.

The inspiration behind this gem is a complete mystery to me. It owes nothing to the Stones blues or r'n'b roots nor is it like anything within the pop field the band had been working in since late 65.

You can perhaps trace its inception through those other dark, buzzing mid-60s pop masterpieces - Satisfaction, Get Off Of My Cloud and 19th Nervous Breakdown but nothing really gave a hint of this proto-punk sturm and drang.

If anything it gives a nod to The Who's amphetamined-up, pop art sound on My Generation but takes it to a complete different level.

And more than anything it captures that unique feel of pre-psychedelic London in late 66, the old Mod soul/r'n'b scene on the way out and the first hint of fuzzed up freak beat around the corner.

I so hope that they play it live on the next tour and that they open with it. If they do, I predict a riot, at least where Mr Dagger will be standing.

I did not like the original version (overproduced) but I like very much this one... Hoping to hear it the next tour...This song deserves a come back...

Quote
The Sicilian
I never liked it, I would always cringe when it came on. Too much treble and distortion. The strings and brass don't fit. Terrible singing.

Gotta agree. This one just grates on me. There's no groove, no tension, no build-up, no release.

And the tempo is just way too frantic. It kind of epitomizes my basic gripe with punk music: the energy of a song does not come from its tempo.

Poorly produced as well.

Apologies to those who love this song.

Drew

I always liked it, I would always turn it up when it came on. So much treble and distortion. The strings and brass are incredible. Inspired singing.

Brilliant song. I've read somewhere that they saw Hendrix live at some club a few weeks before recording this song and the intro was somewhat influenced by him.

A flawed masterpiece, but a masterpiece nonetheless. A very loud recording. Lots to take in, and it borders on shrillness at times. But still brilliant...Questions: Did Keith really play bass on this, and are we sure Brian played any guitar at all on it?

71Tele, where did you hear that Keith played bass on it? I've always seen Bill getting the bass credit on this one. As for Brian, the mix is so thick and 'wall of sound-ish', who can say for sure? Although chances are he did play on it, and its just buried in the mix.

For more discussion on this song, here's a fairly recent thread:

[www.iorr.org]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-11-30 05:43 by Keefan.

Quote
Keefan
71Tele, where did you hear that Keith played bass on it? I've always seen Bill getting the bass credit on this one. As for Brian, the mix is so thick and 'wall of sound-ish', who can say for sure? Although chances are he did play on it, and its just buried in the mix.

For more discussion on this song, here's a fairly recent thread:

[www.iorr.org]

Just remember reading it somewhere, but don't hold me to it!

Boy, it sure sounds like Bill in that 19th Nervous Breakdown mode. I've never been able to pin down what a Keith bass line sounds like. When I found out he did the bass on Jumpin' Jack Flash I thought he was just imitating Bill's style. The bass on Happy is very Bill. The only thing that stands out as different is the samba bass on Sympathy. And soon after Happy I never heard Keith distinguish himself on bass again.

Why this 'Was Bill really play on this song' 'What guitar was played by Brian'??? Bill and Brian plays on everything up to Between the buttons, after that Brian lost a little intresst for the Pop-band Rolling Stones but Bill loved it...Apache Woman tralalala...

2 1 2 0

Quote
24FPS
Boy, it sure sounds like Bill in that 19th Nervous Breakdown mode. I've never been able to pin down what a Keith bass line sounds like. When I found out he did the bass on Jumpin' Jack Flash I thought he was just imitating Bill's style. The bass on Happy is very Bill. The only thing that stands out as different is the samba bass on Sympathy. And soon after Happy I never heard Keith distinguish himself on bass again.

Keith's bass is much busier than Bill's and also is usually turned up louder in the mix. Check out Casino Boogie for a classic Keith bass line.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-11-30 18:28 by 71Tele.

Quote
Come On
Why this 'Was Bill really play on this song' 'What guitar was played by Brian'??? Bill and Brian plays on everything up to Between the buttons, after that Brian lost a little intresst for the Pop-band Rolling Stones but Bill loved it...Apache Woman tralalala...

Brian had started to not play guitar on some tracks by then, according to Keith and others.

But if it is true - I don't know - that not either Bill or Brian were present at all in doing this song - or at least contributing in the released version - then there is not much left of the original band cohesion by then. It is then a clear Mick, Keith and Andrew show.

I would suggest that Brian might have played some guitar in it in order to do something. Being a high-profile-single, I think it could be reasonable to suggest that they all were somehow involved in making it - that there was still enough a band feeling left in them then. Since there are not any "exotic" instruments - I don't count trumbet - he might have taken his old axe. But this is just speculation, not based on any facts.

Bill's account of it in ROLLING WITH THE STONES is funny. According to him "all the UK press say" that it will be another #1 but it was actually their first flop chartwise - and a sign that all they after-all are normal mortals as a hit single band. It was their worst chart (#5) appearance since "I Wanna be Your Man" (#12). This was noticed also by the press and some key people were asked how this is possible (as The Beatles vs. Stones rivalry were in its peak, and anything released by the big boys of pop were considered as sure number ones - with the Beatles that was actually true.) Clapton said something to the effect that perhaps the kids "didn't get it".

I wonder if the grains for Andrew's departure were seeded then. The song, if anything, is an Oldhamian interpetation of Spector's wall sound. Maybe then his ability to sense a hit record started to sound doubtable. Taking also the fact that ,as Wyman says, "we took longer to record and mix this single than any of our previous singles", the result (no matter what we think of it) surely is not their best by then. Even though the next single "Ruby Tuesday"/"Let's Spend The Night Together" was a major hit again, a production of BETWEEN THE BUTTONS was clearly showing that 'not very musically talented' Oldham was perhaps not any longer the man needed for the demanding job. As the possibilities and technology got better (and more time in hands), also the people who were leading the sessions, needed to have more true talent. By 1967 the time of lucky amateurs was over. Seemingly The Stones didn't respect or trust their producer any longer. Perhaps recording of "Have You Seen Your Mother" might have indicated that Andrew's shortages are coming a major issue for them. But like with Brian, Andrew was "one of the lads",a big factor in the their original team of success, so getting rid of him was not so easily done. I mean more in mentally than in technically. They still were then more like a bunch of mates than business partners.

- Doxa



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 2010-11-30 11:22 by Doxa.

I am sure Brian plays on it. On the Sulivan clip he mimes the end so I bet he did some of the distortion. I didn't like it when I first heard it but it grew on me and is now a classic to my ears.

Tried to track down the brass players, still a mystery to me.
Anyone have an idea?

René

When i was young, i used to hear this tune with headphones andmaximum volume, the bass lines were the best of this song for me

I actually like better the live version of GOT LIVE IF YOU WANT IT! because there the 'real song' can be heard more clearly. There is so much vitalness in Mick's voice when he rushes through it, and Keith's clear and distinct background vocal is one of his best ever. All those instinctive and innocent "babbabaddaddaas..." Just can't resist! Over-dubs or not, I don't care.

I also like the way the song chaotically ends and transforms itself to a majestic "Satisfaction" riff... one of those great transcendental Rolling Stones moments - unfortunately - I have heard - this is killed by the new editions of the album. Is it true? I only listen to the original vinyl version.

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-11-30 14:19 by Doxa.

Quote
Keefan
71Tele, where did you hear that Keith played bass on it? I've always seen Bill getting the bass credit on this one. As for Brian, the mix is so thick and 'wall of sound-ish', who can say for sure? Although chances are he did play on it, and its just buried in the mix.

For more discussion on this song, here's a fairly recent thread:

[www.iorr.org]

Maybe here? [www.timeisonourside.com]

Even the title is lame. I think it is more of an underground song than mainstream by a mile.

I have to admit this, the song is a cringe song if it ever gets played on the radio in a car. You hope that no one under 40 is with you because it has an embarrassment factor to it if you don't change the station or turn it down.

The other song that always does this for me is the beginning of the Beatles "Revolution". After that intro and primal scream, which makes me wanna hide, the song has depth.

I remember Mick saying that this was the last in the series of social commentary rock epics like Satisfaction and Cloud and a bit over the top.

I was merely speculating about Brian possibly not playing guitar on it. It is very hard to pick the guitars clearly out of the messy wall-of-sound mix.

It was alway said that Bill played bass..Not sure anyone else at the time could have played it better then he
did on this song...Its again the Stones gone wild...

***********************************************************
"What I'm doing is a sexual thing. I dance and all dancing is a replacement for sex". - Mick Jagger