Quote
kleermaker
Good question Tele, and let's not forget the 1970 tour had even more Berry(-like) songs (Live With Me included). Both the 1972 and certainly the European 1973 Tour have considerably less 'Berry'. I think because it was really too much out of time in those years. But still I'm surprised they had so much Berry(-like) songs in their 1969 and 1970 setlists. Actually those were anachronistic songs at that time to include and their number on Ya Ya's (3 of 10) is quite much and an over-representation imo.

They certainly could have included Satisfaction, because they played a modernized version during the 69 tour, and especially the slow, Oakland-like version of I'm Free with Taylor's meandering guitar would have fit very well, song-wise and in the spirit of the time. Also Gimme Shelter would have been an excellent choice.

Gimme Shelter an excellent choice? Which version would be good enough to be included on Ya-Ya's? They only played it 5 times on the 69 tour. Then I don't see the connection with Berry and Live With Me -LWM is a totally different kind of song, diffent beat, tempo and chord structure. The solo is typical Richards, and that is based on Berry, as usual.

And if you take LWM as a Berry number -they played Route 66, Bye Bye Johnnie, Little Queenie and a Berry-esque It's All Over Now on the Winter Tour. That's five songs.

Mathijs

Quote
71Tele
I was listening to the deluxe reissue of Ya Yas today and I thought of a question I have long had regarding the choice of material at the time the original release was put together. There were so many great songs played in '69. Obviously there was the time limitation of vinyl records, but why leave off the blistering version of Satisfaction? Was it felt that that song was over-exposed already? Or just not "current" enough? (same with Under My Thumb/I'm Free). And TWO Chuck Berry songs? Was the intent to throw some publishing royalties Chuck's way? Just wondering if anyone can shed a little light on this.

I think its probably for two reasons

1) to showcase the 'new' Stones and
2) Under My Thumb and Satisfaction were already on a previous live album.

Back then, they were somewhat anxious not to have live albums containing the same content as much as possible. Especially the most recent live album. The next live album, Love You Live, despite being a double, only included three songs (JJF, HTW and Sympathy) which had been on Ya Yas (plus the 'half song' of 'Cloud' which was featured in full on GLIYWI). 'Still Life' had 3 songs which had been on GLIYWI 16 years earlier, but nothing that had been on Ya Yas or LYL.

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
kleermaker
Good question Tele, and let's not forget the 1970 tour had even more Berry(-like) songs (Live With Me included). Both the 1972 and certainly the European 1973 Tour have considerably less 'Berry'. I think because it was really too much out of time in those years. But still I'm surprised they had so much Berry(-like) songs in their 1969 and 1970 setlists. Actually those were anachronistic songs at that time to include and their number on Ya Ya's (3 of 10) is quite much and an over-representation imo.

They certainly could have included Satisfaction, because they played a modernized version during the 69 tour, and especially the slow, Oakland-like version of I'm Free with Taylor's meandering guitar would have fit very well, song-wise and in the spirit of the time. Also Gimme Shelter would have been an excellent choice.

Gimme Shelter an excellent choice? Which version would be good enough to be included on Ya-Ya's? They only played it 5 times on the 69 tour. Then I don't see the connection with Berry and Live With Me -LWM is a totally different kind of song, diffent beat, tempo and chord structure. The solo is typical Richards, and that is based on Berry, as usual.

And if you take LWM as a Berry number -they played Route 66, Bye Bye Johnnie, Little Queenie and a Berry-esque It's All Over Now on the Winter Tour. That's five songs.

Mathijs

Additionally, 'Gimme Shelter' wasnt played at any of the four shows used for Ya Yas.

The Berry numbers and LIV, Gotta Move and Prodigal Son (a track as a self-reference in my opinion) are part of their back to the roots programm. There are always on top, when they play the blues, '67 was a lost year with the strongly BJ-influenced experimental "Majesty" and "Button" crap. So they were Prodigal Sons which are on the point of returning to their blues and Rock'n Roll gods.

Quote
RobertJohnson
The Berry numbers and LIV, Gotta Move and Prodigal Son (a track as a self-reference in my opinion) are part of their back to the roots programm. There are always on top, when they play the blues, '67 was a lost year with the strongly BJ-influenced experimental "Majesty" and "Button" crap. So they were Prodigal Sons which are on the point of returning to their blues and Rock'n Roll gods.

so then why wasn't "Prodigal Son" on the album, Robert?

Quote
cc

Quote
RobertJohnson
The Berry numbers and LIV, Gotta Move and Prodigal Son (a track as a self-reference in my opinion) are part of their back to the roots programm. There are always on top, when they play the blues, '67 was a lost year with the strongly BJ-influenced experimental "Majesty" and "Button" crap. So they were Prodigal Sons which are on the point of returning to their blues and Rock'n Roll gods.

so then why wasn't "Prodigal Son" on the album, Robert?

I think they decided (unfortunately) to do a one LP album. With LIV, the Berrys they have 3 traditional covers out of 10; PS would have made the 4:6 relation, unusual for a band with a song-writer image. And don't forget: LQ was actually a new track, never recorded before in studio.

Quote
liddas

What I never understood is why was Devil kept so early in the set list (here the Ya Ya's set list makes more sense). And, second, how could the band turn down from the super excitement of Devil to the slowed down tempo of stray cat? Bho!

C

these are good questions... overlapping somewhat with the Sicilian's thread on the '81 Hampton show--it can be hard to understand the pacing of these late '60s-early '70s rock shows. It seems as if the intent was often to "cool out", to NOT create too much excitement. Doesn't it seem as if mick brings things down between numbers rather than amps them up? He seems to be whispering to the crowd all the time. Until at least until the last 2 or 3 songs, when suddenly the gate comes up. It may be the late hour they went on--and much of the crowd is asleep or stoned--or it may be the tuning problems they have between every number, but the shows from "the classic period" don't flow all that well, to the extent that it seems intentional.

Gimme Shelter: the Oakland 2nd version for instance.

Carol, Little Q, LWM: all in the same category in my humble but very musical ears.

Route 66 etc. from the 73 winter tour were the vintage part of those shows. Some demonstration of the past ("I hope I remember the words we do" ) as a contrast to the other, new songs (Hey man, we did play that in the past, isn't that just ages ago??). Not comparable to the context they played those Berry songs in during the 69 and 70 tours.

Btw the 71 tour wasn't that bad at all. Listen to the Roundhouse version of LIV and MR for instance. Both are great.

Quote
RobertJohnson
The Berry numbers and LIV, Gotta Move and Prodigal Son (a track as a self-reference in my opinion) are part of their back to the roots programm. There are always on top, when they play the blues, '67 was a lost year with the strongly BJ-influenced experimental "Majesty" and "Button" crap. So they were Prodigal Sons which are on the point of returning to their blues and Rock'n Roll gods.

True but the role of Brian Jones is wrongly stated. It could be that he was naturally the most experemental or musical - or was able to come up with best or convincing results in that field - but he was the biggest and purest blues man of them all, and he hated the pop/psychedelic stuff through which Mick and Keith were directing and leading them. Brian's contribution to BETWEEN THE BUTTONS and THEIR SATANIC MAJESTIES was also showing the quantitative decline from the heights of AFTERMATH even though he - no doubt - was still a substantive member (even though the other substances seemed to interest him more...). Brian, if anyone, was more than happy for the Stones to rediscover their blues essence but unfortunately his physical and mental condition - especially after the second bust - seemed to ruin his future in the band, and there was not much use of him any longer.

I's a bit ironical - actually: unjust - that Brian Jones's legacy is so much associated with that "1967 crap", despite his personal disliking of the era... For some reason, Mick and Keith haven't never been too vocal about the band being 100 percent command in their hands then... seems easier to blame the dead acid head... ...

- Doxa



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2011-01-03 19:52 by Doxa.

Quote
ab
I always assumed that they left off Satisfaction and Under My Thumb because they had already released live versions of those songs on Got Live If You Want It!

Probably but remember, both were considered passe and "commercial" in the context of the era. After '68 many artists went to some lengths to forget their Top 40/Bubblegum pasts.

I agree that the band was certainly making a statement to American audiences with the carefully selected performances of Carol, LQ, PS and YGM; as well as the "roots" feel of BB and LIB. Obviously the band found its own RnR voice as well. At the same time it was tapping into its musical roots it was extending the RnR lexicon as well. I do not like to use the word "best" because I never try to confuse my taste with quality, but '69 is my favorite tour. If I had to grab one Stones CD off the shelf, I would be hard pressed not to take "Ya'Ya's."

Quote
pmk251
... I do not like to use the word "best" because I never try to confuse my taste with quality, but '69 is my favorite tour. If I had to grab one Stones CD off the shelf, I would be hard pressed not to take "Ya'Ya's."

Until they release the 'London/Rotterdam/Brussels' 1973 CD. Then you're in real trouble!

Maybe it's nor that difficult, if there was room left on the record they would have add them, the oldies just didn't make it..........

__________________________

These are the Set lists from MGS in 1969:
DATE: 11/27/69
Venue: New York
Setlist:
Jumping Jack Flash
Carol
Sympathy For The Devil
Stray Cat Blues
Love In Vain
Prodigal Son
You Gotta Move
Under My Thumb >>>
I'm Free
Midnight Rambler
Live With Me
Little Queenie
Satisfaction
Honky Tonk Women
Street Fighting Man

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATE: 11/28/69
Venue: New York (1st Show)
Setlist:
included:
Jumping Jack Flash
Carol
Sympathy For The Devil
Stray Cat Blues
Little Queenie
Satisfaction
Street Fighting Man

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATE: 11/28/69
Venue: New York (2nd Show)
Setlist:
Jumping Jack Flash
Carol
Sympathy For The Devil
Stray Cat Blues
Love In Vain
Prodigal Son
You Gotta Move
Under My Thumb >>>
I'm Free
Midnight Rambler
Live With Me
Little Queenie
Satisfaction
Honky Tonk Women
Street Fighting Man

Let's not forget that vinyl records could not last more than 23 minutes per side.
This means that, generally speaking, you can place just one long song per side and fill the rest of the side with short songs.
During the '69 tour, the RS tended to play long versions of their songs or even a medley.
If you don't want to have a four-song album, you can't place Under My Thumb/I'm Free and Midnight Rambler and Sympatyhy for the Devil and Satisfaction on a unique LP.
The compiler - the definitive track-listing was made by DECCA, not by the RS - had to make some (unpopular) choises: 1.) no 'Satisfaction', as it is on Got LIVE If You Want it already, 2.) recent hits are ok (Jumping Jack Flash and Honky Tonk Women), 3.) 'made in USA' crowd pleasers are ok (penned by Chuck Berry), 4.) songs from Beggar's Banquet and Let it Bleed are ok: they re-wamp sales, 5.) shorten Sympathy for the Devil to give room to one more song on side 2.
Surely, two Berry songs are a lot, but it's nobody's fault if they were deep into him, at the time. During the 1970 tour of Europe, they played Roll Over Beeethoven and Let it Rock during the Farewell concerts...
They played a lot of covers (Love in Vain, You Gotta Move, Prodigal Son, the Berry's ones): it's history.
If 'Frampton Comes Alive' had set the trend for 2LP live records years before, we'd have had the complete show and nobody would regret for the selected songs.
Just one question remains unanswered: how can it be that they've not released the complete Sympathy for the Devil onto the 2010 re-issue?

Quote
kleermaker
Gimme Shelter: the Oakland 2nd version for instance.

They didn't record this show for a future release.

Quote
kleermaker
Carol, Little Q, LWM: all in the same category in my humble but very musical ears.

Route 66 etc. from the 73 winter tour were the vintage part of those shows. Some demonstration of the past ("I hope I remember the words we do" ) as a contrast to the other, new songs (Hey man, we did play that in the past, isn't that just ages ago??). Not comparable to the context they played those Berry songs in during the 69 and 70 tours.

How on earth is LWM in the same veign as the Berry tracks? About everything to this song is different to the classic Berry R&R....And your reasoning about why they played which song is just nonsense. All that's black can be reasoned white in this way.

Quote
kleermaker
Btw the 71 tour wasn't that bad at all.

Well, we don't know that, do we. We only have three shows, and one of them is fantastic (Roundhouse), and two of them actually mediocre to pretty bad (Leeds and Marquee).

Mathijs

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
kleermaker
Gimme Shelter: the Oakland 2nd version for instance.

They didn't record this show for a future release.

Quote
kleermaker
Carol, Little Q, LWM: all in the same category in my humble but very musical ears.

Route 66 etc. from the 73 winter tour were the vintage part of those shows. Some demonstration of the past ("I hope I remember the words we do" ) as a contrast to the other, new songs (Hey man, we did play that in the past, isn't that just ages ago??). Not comparable to the context they played those Berry songs in during the 69 and 70 tours.

How on earth is LWM in the same veign as the Berry tracks? About everything to this song is different to the classic Berry R&R....And your reasoning about why they played which song is just nonsense. All that's black can be reasoned white in this way.

Quote
kleermaker
Btw the 71 tour wasn't that bad at all.

Well, we don't know that, do we. We only have three shows, and one of them is fantastic (Roundhouse), and two of them actually mediocre to pretty bad (Leeds and Marquee).

Mathijs

That's 33,33333333333% Fantastic,Leeds was good too imo,the Marqee mediocre.
No bad statistics for one year.

Quote
RobertJohnson
'67 was a lost year with the strongly BJ-influenced experimental "Majesty" and "Button" crap.

A quick listen of the Satanic Sessions bootleg box sets reveals that Keith was very much musically directing things in 1967.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-01-03 23:25 by His Majesty.

It was Liddas, I think you asked the question why SFTD was so early in the set in 69. I would say that it was Sympathy's first tour, and it had not achieved it's mythical status. They had hardened the samba up considerably for the live stage, and may have seen it as an early-set heat-setter. It was a fierce number that was going to get the place jumping.
This was the tour where the book was just being written. Of how rock tours and shows are paced.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
RobertJohnson
The Berry numbers and LIV, Gotta Move and Prodigal Son (a track as a self-reference in my opinion) are part of their back to the roots programm. There are always on top, when they play the blues, '67 was a lost year with the strongly BJ-influenced experimental "Majesty" and "Button" crap. So they were Prodigal Sons which are on the point of returning to their blues and Rock'n Roll gods.

True but the role of Brian Jones is wrongly stated. It could be that he was naturally the most experemental or musical - or was able to come up with best or convincing results in that field - but he was the biggest and purest blues man of them all, and he hated the pop/psychedelic stuff through which Mick and Keith were directing and leading them. Brian's contribution to BETWEEN THE BUTTONS and THEIR SATANIC MAJESTIES was also showing the quantitative decline from the heights of AFTERMATH even though he - no doubt - was still a substantive member (even though the other substances seemed to interest him more...). Brian, if anyone, was more than happy for the Stones to rediscover their blues essence but unfortunately his physical and mental condition - especially after the second bust - seemed to ruin his future in the band, and there was not much use of him any longer.

I's a bit ironical - actually: unjust - that Brian Jones's legacy is so much associated with that "1967 crap", despite his personal disliking of the era... For some reason, Mick and Keith haven't never been too vocal about the band being 100 percent command in their hands then... seems easier to blame the dead acid head... ...

- Doxa

Thank you very much for this information; this seems to be evident, because in the beginning they played the blues to a great extent; at that time the influence of BJ on the musical trends of the band hits its peak so that he was considered to be its founder. In fact the musical interests of BJ in playing diverse "non-rock and blues" instruments led to my misinterpretation above.

Quote
Mathijs
Well, we don't know that, do we. We only have three shows, and one of them is fantastic (Roundhouse), and two of them actually mediocre to pretty bad (Leeds and Marquee).
Mathijs

Do yourself a favour and get yourself a copy of Coventry 1971, Mathijs

I am sure he has it . . .

But Leeds "mediocre to bad," Mathijs? That's a beloved show to so many of us, despite the bum notes. There's just nothing else like those mellow arrangements, and the sound is awesome.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-01-06 18:59 by Zack.