For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Amsterdamned
I really would like to read Taylor's comments on the Rolling Stones attitude and "workflow" in the studio. Taylor seemed to master things in 1, 2 or 3 takes. Now that might have been a bit different with Keith..
Keith is known for wanting to record multiple takes of each song. According to himself he never chooses the perfect take
Quote
sweetcharmedlifeI don't know. This quote suggests it won't be a fluff piece.Quote
71Tele
"I don't want to write the kind of book that will shock people, about the scandals, sex, drugs and rock and roll," he explains.
Well, good luck finding a publisher then.
"I kind of loved it. I loved it and I hated it. The more successful the Stones became the more seriously they took themselves."
Quote
marcovandereijk
As autobiographies par definition always tell the story from one point of view, it is nice
to have more autobiographies from different people. I am curious if Bill Wyman would one day
come with a second part of his autobiography, to take us through the 70s.
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
marcovandereijk
As autobiographies par definition always tell the story from one point of view, it is nice
to have more autobiographies from different people. I am curious if Bill Wyman would one day
come with a second part of his autobiography, to take us through the 70s.
Didn't Stone Alone take us through the 80s?
Quote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
marcovandereijk
As autobiographies par definition always tell the story from one point of view, it is nice
to have more autobiographies from different people. I am curious if Bill Wyman would one day
come with a second part of his autobiography, to take us through the 70s.
Didn't Stone Alone take us through the 80s?
No, it didn't. As a sort of introduction to the theme of the book he introduced some recent affairs by the time of writing the book - and some personal issues between Keith, Mick and him. But the actual story covered just the Brian era. But he gave quite a stong indication that whatever happend since 1969 doesn't really matter, at least from his point of view. He sounds quite bitter, especially around the time of making BEGGARS BANQUET, when the band turned nothing but a Jagger/Richards dominance show. Also if we look ROLLING WIH THE STONES, that suppsedly covers Bill's all years in the band, it is the 60's that take the bulk of the book.
Even though Bill mentioned some time ago tha he might write a new book on his time with the Stones, I will be surprised if he would actually cover the 70's to an extent and detail as he does in STONE ALONE. I have the impression that he was not happy at all within the and during the 70's. It might be challenging for him to make it as proper as he is in STONE ALONE. STONE ALONE has a clear agenda and story in it - he wants to reveal something from the back pages that seemed to be quite generally forgotten by the end of the 80's (that of Brian's central role, and that of their equalness in the early days before Andrew "made" Keith). It's very difficult to see what kind of 'story' he might come up with from the 70's. It could be something like: TRYING TO COPE WITH THE JUNKIES. Perhaps Keith with LIFE made a market for that kind of stuff, and Wyman's perspective would charm the moralist camp these days... some money there probably...
Of course, I'd love to see the book some day!
- Doxa
Quote
71TeleQuote
duke richardson
I think it'll be a good read. I think Lightnin', on the board here, is the co-author. Or at least the editorial consultant.
Good timing, with the 50th and all. Looking forward to it.
You mean co-author on the Taylor book?
Quote
DandelionPowderMan
Yeah, you may be right. Still, I remember clearly that Bill is writing about the SW-tour, and how good he thought it was. He was saying something like "this was our best tour ever, and now we can call us professionals", or something.
Quote
Doxa
In fact, I would prefer to hear Taylor's account of making the music during the era he was onboard than Wyman's. I think Taylor was more involved, and what is more, actually present, when the masterpieces were done during the era. Wyman refused to live accoding to Keith's "junkie time", and thereby missed some key sessions. And regards to Taylor, it would be interesting to hear how Jagger and him wrote together, etc. Besides, Taylor was actually involved in the "things" Keith writes so much about in LIFE...
I really hopw (a) Taylor would some day got his book finished & published, (b) he makes it as professional sounding musician's biography than he is as a musician. That means that the scandals, speaking of cocks, and loathing band members would be left out ("sex, drugs & rock&roll), even though that decision will lose potential readers. There is a market - or at least life - outside the hype and best sale lists. If the guy has balls to say 'fvck off' to one of the most popular bands in the music history, and leave what we lesser souls might think as a dream job in the business, he can publish a biography wothout cheap selling tricks.
- Doxa
Quote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
marcovandereijk
As autobiographies par definition always tell the story from one point of view, it is nice
to have more autobiographies from different people. I am curious if Bill Wyman would one day
come with a second part of his autobiography, to take us through the 70s.
Didn't Stone Alone take us through the 80s?
No, it didn't. As a sort of introduction to the theme of the book he introduced some recent affairs by the time of writing the book - and some personal issues between Keith, Mick and him. But the actual story covered just the Brian era. But he gave quite a stong indication that whatever happend since 1969 doesn't really matter, at least from his point of view. He sounds quite bitter, especially around the time of making BEGGARS BANQUET, when the band turned nothing but a Jagger/Richards dominance show. Also if we look ROLLING WIH THE STONES, that suppsedly covers Bill's all years in the band, it is the 60's that take the bulk of the book.
Even though Bill mentioned some time ago tha he might write a new book on his time with the Stones, I will be surprised if he would actually cover the 70's to an extent and detail as he does in STONE ALONE. I have the impression that he was not happy at all within the and during the 70's. It might be challenging for him to make it as proper as he is in STONE ALONE. STONE ALONE has a clear agenda and story in it - he wants to reveal something from the back pages that seemed to be quite generally forgotten by the end of the 80's (that of Brian's central role, and that of their equalness in the early days before Andrew "made" Keith). It's very difficult to see what kind of 'story' he might come up with from the 70's. It could be something like: TRYING TO COPE WITH THE JUNKIES. Perhaps Keith with LIFE made a market for that kind of stuff, and Wyman's perspective would charm the moralist camp these days... some money there probably...
Of course, I'd love to see the book some day!
- Doxa
Quote
Doxa
In fact, I would prefer to hear Taylor's account of making the music during the era he was onboard than Wyman's. I think Taylor was more involved, and what is more, actually present, when the masterpieces were done during the era. Wyman refused to live accoding to Keith's "junkie time", and thereby missed some key sessions. And regards to Taylor, it would be interesting to hear how Jagger and him wrote together, etc. Besides, Taylor was actually involved in the "things" Keith writes so much about in LIFE...
I really hopw (a) Taylor would some day got his book finished & published, (b) he makes it as professional sounding musician's biography than he is as a musician. That means that the scandals, speaking of cocks, and loathing band members would be left out ("sex, drugs & rock&roll), even though that decision will lose potential readers. There is a market - or at least life - outside the hype and best sale lists. If the guy has balls to say 'fvck off' to one of the most popular bands in the music history, and leave what we lesser souls might think as a dream job in the business, he can publish a biography wothout cheap selling tricks.
- Doxa
Quote
stonescrowQuote
its good to be anywhere
Stonescrow said:Exactly.Quote
No scores to settle? Sounds pretty boring. Maybe Keith can give him a few pointers
+1
Yes, and Mick can do the editing like he did with the book he co-authored with Keith! Oh, were not supposed to know that!
Quote
AmsterdamnedQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Amsterdamned
I really would like to read Taylor's comments on the Rolling Stones attitude and "workflow" in the studio. Taylor seemed to master things in 1, 2 or 3 takes. Now that might have been a bit different with Keith..
Keith is known for wanting to record multiple takes of each song. According to himself he never chooses the perfect take
He might as well do it in one take then.
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
AmsterdamnedQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Amsterdamned
I really would like to read Taylor's comments on the Rolling Stones attitude and "workflow" in the studio. Taylor seemed to master things in 1, 2 or 3 takes. Now that might have been a bit different with Keith..
Keith is known for wanting to record multiple takes of each song. According to himself he never chooses the perfect take
He might as well do it in one take then.
What do you mean? He said he always went for the take with the most feel, and steered clear off the best technical takes.
Quote
AmsterdamnedQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
AmsterdamnedQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Amsterdamned
I really would like to read Taylor's comments on the Rolling Stones attitude and "workflow" in the studio. Taylor seemed to master things in 1, 2 or 3 takes. Now that might have been a bit different with Keith..
Keith is known for wanting to record multiple takes of each song. According to himself he never chooses the perfect take
He might as well do it in one take then.
What do you mean? He said he always went for the take with the most feel, and steered clear off the best technical takes.
Very simple: Keith is a self-made man, his playing is never about technic ( please don't misunderstand me ) but feeling. As long as his guitar is in tune it doesn't matter that much, his rhythm guitar in particular. That's always ok to me. So imo it doesn't matter anyway. I'am talking Taylor era btw.
Quote
Come On
This book is something I'm really, really, really, REALLY, REALLY looking forward to read...
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
AmsterdamnedQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
AmsterdamnedQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Amsterdamned
I really would like to read Taylor's comments on the Rolling Stones attitude and "workflow" in the studio. Taylor seemed to master things in 1, 2 or 3 takes. Now that might have been a bit different with Keith..
Keith is known for wanting to record multiple takes of each song. According to himself he never chooses the perfect take
He might as well do it in one take then.
What do you mean? He said he always went for the take with the most feel, and steered clear off the best technical takes.
Very simple: Keith is a self-made man, his playing is never about technic ( please don't misunderstand me ) but feeling. As long as his guitar is in tune it doesn't matter that much, his rhythm guitar in particular. That's always ok to me. So imo it doesn't matter anyway. I'am talking Taylor era btw.
This case is beyond that, it's about the whole song. Like Keith has said many times: "We had four technically better versions of this song, but we chose the take with the most energy".
That is something else.
BTW, most of the people in the rock business are self-made men
Quote
mikeeder
Taylor will do a fine book. I trust what he says far more then Jagger or Richards.
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Come On
This book is something I'm really, really, really, REALLY, REALLY looking forward to read...
Me too, but it might not be as exciting as people think. Taylor is a nice guy.
Quote
sweetcharmedlife
Taylor said his project will differ from the controversial tome Richards released last fall. "I don't want to write the kind of book that will shock people, about the scandals, sex, drugs and rock and roll," he explains, "because Keith's done that with his book."
Quote
saltoftheearth
And I do not mean silly specualations about genitals but the real thing.
Quote
SoulPlunderer
If the talk that he might play with the band in some capacity during any upcoming tour has any truth in it, then he'd be best not to upset anyone with a "tell-all" autobiography.
Lot of rock stars are doing books these days.Obviously a market for it. Maybe Mick's just strikeing while he can.Quote
GazzaQuote
SoulPlunderer
If the talk that he might play with the band in some capacity during any upcoming tour has any truth in it, then he'd be best not to upset anyone with a "tell-all" autobiography.
Was thinking that myself. Odd timing to say the least. Even Bill waited until a couple of months after his final Stones shows to publish 'Stone Alone', and that was hardly rough on his fellow bandmates.
Bobby Keys even has a memoir called 'Every Night is a Saturday Night' coming out in March 2012 too.