nzentgraf.de
December 1969:


Brown Sugar I (MJ/KR) -STU on piano, very early vocal mix, with "oh baby" at end
Brown Sugar II (MJ/KR) - STU on piano; new vocals, no sax, much better mix to version I, from "Decca-acetate"
Brown Sugar III (MJ/KR) - STU on piano; partly to be heard in Gimme Shelter movie, released on Hot Rocks (by mistake on 1st pressings only!)
Brown Sugar IV (MJ/KR) -Bobby Keys on sax, Al Kooper on piano, Eric Clapton on guitar; maybe recorded on the 18th December

Quote
71Tele

Quote
Carnaby
Hey 71. I kinda like the Live at Leeds one.

Me too! But we should save live versions for a separate thread, as there are millions of them. My fave would be Brussells '73, followed closely by '72.

Wouldn't be nice if someone found a studio version of Let It Rock?

Quote
Big Al
So the Clapton version wasn't on any initial pressing of Hot Rocks?

No!

Quote
straycatblues73

Quote
Rank Stranger
Hi straycatblues73!

The solo starting at 1:53 sounds like pure Clapton to me!
By no way am I an expert on these matters, but I will go so far to say, that the pictures in the "YouTube" post seem incorrect to me too, as I believe Clapton is playing a Fender here, not the Gibson!
Maybe we'll have to wait til Mathijs looks into this thread!

yes , rank friend , we'll wait till somebody else comes up with something , i agree that it sounds like clapton but some of those phrases were used by taylor later .

This is one of the reasons why I too believe it could be Taylor playing together with Clapton.

The other one is that most of the slide parts are played as if who is playing is not very confident with the song. This makes sense because it was a one go for Clapton. But then there are parts that are played with a less uncertain touch, have a great vibrato and do resemble some of the phrases that Taylor would play in 72. And indeed at times there are 3 guitars playing together.

C

C

But if it was a one go, it's a bit weird that Taylor should play for 5 seconds or so...

Clapton also tends to take more stops during his solos than Taylor.

Initial pressings of "Hot Rocks" had demo versions of "Brown Sugar" and "Wild Horses"!
Must have matrix date: 11-18-71 AND handwritten: Shelley !

Not the Clapton version and not the version from "Gimmie Shelter" movie!
From Nico's site:

>>Brown Sugar III (MJ/KR) - STU on piano; partly to be heard in Gimme Shelter-
movie, released on Hot Rocks (by mistake on 1st pressings only!) <<

I disagree, the castenets ( or whatever...) are not so prominent in the mix on "Hot Rocks".

Neither B.S. nor W.H. can be uploaded here, as it is official stuff; but you may e-mail me privately, please don't expect an answer before tomorrow!

Thank you for clearing this up for me, Rank Stranger

ok, so no Clapton on Hot Rocks )

Just unbelievable that they didn't use Taylor's guitar for the studio version. It's a boring song on the album. But most live versions during the Taylor era, like the one from the Essen show 1970, are amazing and anything but boring.

Quote
kleermaker
Just unbelievable that they didn't use Taylor's guitar for the studio version. It's a boring song on the album. But most live versions during the Taylor era, like the one from the Essen show 1970, are amazing and anything but boring.

You think Taylor's not on the studio version at all? I thought he was. He certainly doesn't play a solo or anything but I think he does play on the track.

To chime in on the discussion about the Clapton version......Clapton and Taylor are both playing. Clapton is playing slide, and I'll bet my next pay check he's in open tuning, most likely open G although maybe D or E. Clapton usually uses open tuning for slide and you can tell by the "sliding chords" he's using at times that it's an open tuning. He might have played a Fender. He does have a cleaner sound than Taylor on this track for sure but it most likely wasn't Clapton's guitar but one belonging to the Stones. Taylor plays the solo on this version. It's classic Mick T.

Quote
kleermaker
Just unbelievable that they didn't use Taylor's guitar for the studio version. It's a boring song on the album. But most live versions during the Taylor era, like the one from the Essen show 1970, are amazing and anything but boring.

What is truly unbelievable is that there is one Taylor performance that you find boring: in fact Taylor IS on the studio version of Sugar, the one released on Fingers. It's even in printing on the album credits!



C

Quote
liddas

Quote
kleermaker
Just unbelievable that they didn't use Taylor's guitar for the studio version. It's a boring song on the album. But most live versions during the Taylor era, like the one from the Essen show 1970, are amazing and anything but boring.

What is truly unbelievable is that there is one Taylor performance that you find boring: in fact Taylor IS on the studio version of Sugar, the one released on Fingers. It's even in printing on the album credits!



C

I think that even someone with a little mind knows what I mean.

As for the solo in the Clapton-version as being Taylor's: opinions seem to differ. I have to listen to it more carefully to be able to say what's mine.

Quote
kleermaker
Just unbelievable that they didn't use Taylor's guitar for the studio version. It's a boring song on the album. But most live versions during the Taylor era, like the one from the Essen show 1970, are amazing and anything but boring.

LOL! They never got near the quality of the studio version when playing it live, imo.

After 1970, either Keith didn't get the riff right, or he got buried in Taylor's counter melodies.

The Altamont version is good, though.

The pure genius of the studio version is the sound, the use of acoustic guitars on the bridges and the Mick AND Keith vocals + the awesome sax solo, of course.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-13 14:37 by DandelionPowderman.

Quote
kleermaker

I think that even someone with a little mind knows what I mean.

Probably I am too stupid, but I still don't get it. Is there someone with a little mind that can explain?

C

liddas,

he's not that concerned with if the song is good or not. He just wants a Taylor solo in there to finish the icing on the cake.

No offense, kleermaker

Quote
DandelionPowderman
liddas,

he's not that concerned with if the song is good or not. He just wants a Taylor solo in there to finish the icing on the cake.

No offense, kleermaker

Not true either, DP. You don't hear me say this about Sister Morphine or Torn and Frayed for instance (though I would prefer Taylor to play guitar on those songs).
But as for Brown Sugar: I like the song itself, but not the way it's played on the studio version. Thank god we also have the live versions from the 1970 - 1973 era.

no no no - Brown Sugar Live after Taylor was just going through the motions as far as Ron Wood playing any counter melody to Keith's chord progression through the song. With Taylor he adds that Bluesy melodic guitar lines over the chorus and after sax solos. Same thing can be said with JJF . Taylor adds that bluesy killer guitar lines that RW never added.


play the guitar boy

I'm talking about the unbeatable original studio versions, of BS, and JJF for that matter.

imo, they have never been surpassed. That's why I was a bit surprised by kleermaker's take on it. BS studio version is perfection. You gotta be a very big Taylorite to describe that song as "boring", just because Taylor is inaudible on the studio take - or the song is lacking his melodic lines, well-known from the live versions.

I never complain about not hearing Keith's guitar (he only play bass) on the GHS-version of Heartbreaker, although I like the live versions w Keith.

Quote
Tumblin_Dice_07
You think Taylor's not on the studio version at all? I thought he was. He certainly doesn't play a solo or anything but I think he does play on the track..

he would have played , certainly , but the two audible electric guitars are keith

Quote
Tumblin_Dice_07

To chime in on the discussion about the Clapton version......Clapton and Taylor are both playing. Clapton is playing slide, and I'll bet my next pay check he's in open tuning, most likely open G although maybe D or E. Clapton usually uses open tuning for slide and you can tell by the "sliding chords" he's using at times that it's an open tuning. He might have played a Fender. He does have a cleaner sound than Taylor on this track for sure but it most likely wasn't Clapton's guitar but one belonging to the Stones. Taylor plays the solo on this version. It's classic Mick T.

finally somebody agrees with me , thank you

But the question is: Does it sound like Taylor?

I don't think so, but of course I could be wrong.

LOL! They never got near the quality of the studio version when playing it live, imo.

After 1970, either Keith didn't get the riff right, or he got buried in Taylor's counter melodies.

The Altamont version is good, though.

The pure genius of the studio version is the sound, the use of acoustic guitars on the bridges and the Mick and Keith vocals + the awesome sax solo, of course.
<DandelionPowderman>

You should listen to the posted one DP, it swings, there's no problem with Keith, Taylor+ Keys play well along, and Mick doesn't get drowned in Taylors guitar, or do you like stifling or square arrangements when it comes to counterplay?


Imo this version is bettter than the SF version. Let alone the Essen'70 version, which is even more soulfull..,

Give music some fresh air please..

Now anybody gonna tell me Jagger drowns in Mick's counter melodies, stand up!
Music is freedom of speach.

Gimme a break!!









Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-13 15:53 by Amsterdamned.

Quote
Amsterdamned
LOL! They never got near the quality of the studio version when playing it live, imo.

After 1970, either Keith didn't get the riff right, or he got buried in Taylor's counter melodies.

The Altamont version is good, though.

The pure genius of the studio version is the sound, the use of acoustic guitars on the bridges and the Mick and Keith vocals + the awesome sax solo, of course.
<DandelionPowderman>

You should listen to the posted one DP, it swings, there's no problem with Keith, Taylor+ Keys play well along, and Mick doesn't get drowned in Taylors guitar, or do you like stifling or square arrangements when it comes to counterplay?


Imo this version is bettter than the SF version. Let alone the Essen'70 version, which is even more soulfull..,

Give music some fresh air please..

Now anybody gonna tell me Jagger drowns in Mick's counter melodies, stand up!
Music is freedom of speach.

Gimme a break!!

I think I have every bootleg from this era, and I love them all. But none of them, not even the versions on the excellent Rattlesnake STP 72 (where this one is from) beats the original.

PS: BTW, this is a very good example of Keith's coolest licks being drowned by Taylor's more boring licks, imo (right before the chorus)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-13 15:58 by DandelionPowderman.

Taylor is a little low in the mix, but here he comes in at the right time and places with the counter melodies, imo. The only problem with this version is that it is way too short.

This is what I'm talking about! No need for the open G-magic if we can't hear it

Quote
Tumblin_Dice_07
To chime in on the discussion about the Clapton version......Clapton and Taylor are both playing. Clapton is playing slide, and I'll bet my next pay check he's in open tuning, most likely open G although maybe D or E. Clapton usually uses open tuning for slide and you can tell by the "sliding chords" he's using at times that it's an open tuning. He might have played a Fender. He does have a cleaner sound than Taylor on this track for sure but it most likely wasn't Clapton's guitar but one belonging to the Stones. Taylor plays the solo on this version. It's classic Mick T.

To me it sounds like classic Clapton!
Anyway, a great song! Live AND studio!!

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Taylor is a little low in the mix, but here he comes in at the right time and places with the counter melodies, imo. The only problem with this version is that it is way too short.

This is what I'm talking about! No need for the open G-magic if we can't hear it

imagine hearing this song for the very first time in public !
keith plays the original intro ( am i alone to dislike the extra upbeat he has played ever since ? )
mick t plays rhythm only until the ending of the song when he lets rip!

i agree with you about the official sticky fingers version though , it is a masterpiece, guitars nice and crispy and nasty

i forgot

another version , backstage MSG by mick jagger

It can only happen on a website for Rolling Stones fans that somebody could in all seriousness
write a line that the version of Brown Sugar on Sticky Fingers is boring!
I don't like all these smileys stuff, but man, did I roll my eyes after reading that one!

Quote
Rank Stranger

Quote
Tumblin_Dice_07
To chime in on the discussion about the Clapton version......Clapton and Taylor are both playing. Clapton is playing slide, and I'll bet my next pay check he's in open tuning, most likely open G although maybe D or E. Clapton usually uses open tuning for slide and you can tell by the "sliding chords" he's using at times that it's an open tuning. He might have played a Fender. He does have a cleaner sound than Taylor on this track for sure but it most likely wasn't Clapton's guitar but one belonging to the Stones. Taylor plays the solo on this version. It's classic Mick T.

To me it sounds like classic Clapton!
Anyway, a great song! Live AND studio!!

+ 1

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I'm talking about the unbeatable original studio versions, of BS, and JJF for that matter.

imo, they have never been surpassed. That's why I was a bit surprised by kleermaker's take on it. BS studio version is perfection. You gotta be a very big Taylorite to describe that song as "boring", just because Taylor is inaudible on the studio take - or the song is lacking his melodic lines, well-known from the live versions.

I never complain about not hearing Keith's guitar (he only play bass) on the GHS-version of Heartbreaker, although I like the live versions w Keith.

Your last line just says it all! Think about it. As Taylor said in an interview: music consists of rhythm and melody. I miss the melody on BS studio, but I don't miss the rhythm (and melody of course) on Hearbreaker studio.

You like the clavinet substitution by Billy? Good for you.

There is plenty of melody on the BS studio version (Keith/Bobby). We didn't get to hear Keith's original melody lines (the definition of the song, imo) just before the choruses live after 1971 when Taylor was aboard, though.

Taylor does many fantastic things on BS live, though. For me it's too much - had been a lot better if the licks were coming in after the last verse, imo.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-13 17:01 by DandelionPowderman.

I think I have every bootleg from this era, and I love them all. But none of them, not even the versions on the excellent Rattlesnake STP 72 (where this one is from) beats the original.

PS: BTW, this is a very good example of Keith's coolest licks being drowned by Taylor's more boring licks, imo (right before the chorus) <DP>

The SF version is ok, but I prefer them as a live band. Imo Taylor was the less boring
guitar player the Stones ever had when it comes to guitar solos.

So in the end it's a matter of taste.