For Me MSG 1972 7-26 Best Version


SOUL

....68-72 versions...just put it in a bottle...seal it and label it: real rock n'roll.

Truly a masterpiece, both studio version and live (with Mick Taylor).

the studio version is priceless, love the fiddle

and MT on it in 69 and 72, oh yeah

Okay, this song is just beautifully arranged on LIB. I love the slide guitar and the song is just slightly haunting. What a re-interpretation of the Johnson original its very different. the Ya-Ya's version is good as well. I also have a soft spot for the 1978 version and especially the one on Fort Worth. i know Ronnie is no Mick Taylor but I love that version. they go from this sort of 1978 punk rock band and transport themselves back in time just for the one song and Jagger's vocals are awesome for once he almost completely lets go and gets lost in the music. The Stripped version is also good i love it when Keith stops and says I hate that when I don't get that in.

For the record the way the studio version was arranged makes this song a perfect song for Mick Taylor's style of playing. A superb work any time I hear it and always slightly different.

After 1972, the Stones should have retired this song. The '69 and '72 versions are so epic that to play it without that line up does the band and the song a disservice.

Quote
71Tele
After 1972, the Stones should have retired this song. The '69 and '72 versions are so epic that to play it without that line up does the band and the song a disservice.

What's wrong with the Live In Texas-version? Jagger at his absolute best, imo.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
71Tele
After 1972, the Stones should have retired this song. The '69 and '72 versions are so epic that to play it without that line up does the band and the song a disservice.

What's wrong with the Live In Texas-version? Jagger at his absolute best, imo.

It has none of the majesty of the other versions. It's ok. Jagger's good. But the band was incredible in '69. Not just Taylor. Bill's bass was genius. The drama of Charlie holding back until the second verse, I could go on...I like '78 but that song didn't really fit the thrashy mode they were in (which I quite like, by the way).

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
71Tele
After 1972, the Stones should have retired this song. The '69 and '72 versions are so epic that to play it without that line up does the band and the song a disservice.

What's wrong with the Live In Texas-version? Jagger at his absolute best, imo.

Not sure the Mick in question is the issue here.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
71Tele
After 1972, the Stones should have retired this song. The '69 and '72 versions are so epic that to play it without that line up does the band and the song a disservice.

What's wrong with the Live In Texas-version? Jagger at his absolute best, imo.

Not sure the Mick in question is the issue here.

He's pretty important, isn't he?

The way he's taking this song to new heights on LIT is pretty amazing, imo.

And why on earth should we complain about the guitars on LIT???

But do you prefer the LIV from LIT above the LIV on LIB?

Just as long as the guitar plays, let it steal your heart away

No, the LIB-version is my favourite, all the live versions included. The feel of the studio version can't be surpassed, imo.

This was a response to Tele, who claimed that they should have put the song to rest after 1972. I'm glad they didn't, because I really love the 1978-versions

I was only playing with the abbreviations, but thanks for replying anyway.

LIS is a good song too, we will discuss it next week, I suppose.

Just as long as the guitar plays, let it steal your heart away

I think the '69 to '71 versions are alright, but nothing more. I think it actually is quite a boring song....I like the '72 version better cause of Taylor's solo -that is the spice the track really needs. The 78 versions are best -dynamically brilliant, punky, Wood's country slide is great, Watts and Wyman read the song fantastically and follow Jagger beautifully. Fantastic.

Mathijs

Quote
marcovandereijk
I was only playing with the abbreviations, but thanks for replying anyway.

LIS is a good song too, we will discuss it next week, I suppose.

He he, gotcha I'm in on LIS NW

Quote
Rip This
....68-72 versions...just put it in a bottle...seal it and label it: real rock n'roll.

Thankfully it is not rock n' roll.

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
Rip This
....68-72 versions...just put it in a bottle...seal it and label it: real rock n'roll.

Thankfully it is not rock n' roll.

Correct, your Majesty ... it is the blues, of the soulful variety. There is no rock and no roll in this one.

Drew

Love in vain, in my opinion, is the best track on Let it bleed.
Best versions live:

1972-06-24 Tarrant County Convention Center (2nd show), Fort Worth, TX
November 26, 1969 Civic Center, Baltimore

Love the Long John Baldry version, schillid!

It's a tribute to the Stones' reinvention of Love In Vain that when it's covered nowadays there is definitely a choice between going back to Robert Johnson or covering the Stones' version. Interesting to hear the RJ original and listen for the bits of his guitar work that expanded into Keith's acoustic part. I'm glad to see that at least one other poster here cites that as an important part of the song's charm: I could listen to that intro forever. Of course it was the Stones who added all the lonesome train whistles (and MT is very good at them).

marcovandereijk's sequence of videos traces the song's further development into a vehicle for Mick Taylor's majestic live solos - and then back again to its roots on Stripped. Brilliant as Mick Taylor is, I prefer the Stripped version to the rather overblown 6:45 version from MT's later days with the band. I suppose the logical development from that is the bootleg that used to be around which consisted of just the MT solos from umpteen versions of LIV, filleted out from the rest of the song...

I love this tune like an old friend.

Maybe because always reminds me of the one Mexican student in our 30 kid deep 8th grade class. We bonded over the Stones and he showed me this song note for note. He could not speak english very well but his Stones playing was quite clear.

He had learned every little nuance and note in a standard tuning with a sub standard guitar but it was enough to turn me on. peace

I get a little tired of the "they should have retired this tune after 1972". Why? The 78 version has a lot of merit to it aas does the Stripped version. It does not have MT so some think it can't be good. It's different but its still good.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
71Tele
After 1972, the Stones should have retired this song. The '69 and '72 versions are so epic that to play it without that line up does the band and the song a disservice.

What's wrong with the Live In Texas-version? Jagger at his absolute best, imo.

It has none of the majesty of the other versions. It's ok. Jagger's good. But the band was incredible in '69. Not just Taylor. Bill's bass was genius. The drama of Charlie holding back until the second verse, I could go on...I like '78 but that song didn't really fit the thrashy mode they were in (which I quite like, by the way).

THAT was just as good in 78! I understand the song not exactly fitting in the setlist at the time, but I thought it was a nice breather after all the rockers.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-09-19 09:22 by DandelionPowderman.

This version by Keb Mo deserves to me posted here. I nicked it from Green Lady's Track Talk index thread, thank you dear!

I think it is fantastic and possibly better than the Robert Johnson AND the Stones versions. His singing and guitar work here really do the song justice.

I think it was Keith's inability to play the tune in the original alternating bass thumbpicking style (I've never seen him pull that off) as much as his desire to reinterpret the song that created the Stones classic version.

I think Keith would have loved to be able to play the tune like this. Thanks again Green Lady for that turn on, I am grateful. peace

Quote
Naturalust
This version by Keb Mo deserves to me posted here. I nicked it from Green Lady's Track Talk index thread, thank you dear!

I think it is fantastic and possibly better than the Robert Johnson AND the Stones versions. His singing and guitar work here really do the song justice.

I think it was Keith's inability to play the tune in the original alternating bass thumbpicking style (I've never seen him pull that off) as much as his desire to reinterpret the song that created the Stones classic version.

I think Keith would have loved to be able to play the tune like this. Thanks again Green Lady for that turn on, I am grateful. peace

Sure Keith can play guitar this way. The voodoo brew/stew outtakes have plenty of fine examples. And Good times Bad times shows he could do it years before Love in Vain was recorded.

C

Quote
liddas

Quote
Naturalust
This version by Keb Mo deserves to me posted here. I nicked it from Green Lady's Track Talk index thread, thank you dear!

I think it is fantastic and possibly better than the Robert Johnson AND the Stones versions. His singing and guitar work here really do the song justice.

I think it was Keith's inability to play the tune in the original alternating bass thumbpicking style (I've never seen him pull that off) as much as his desire to reinterpret the song that created the Stones classic version.

I think Keith would have loved to be able to play the tune like this. Thanks again Green Lady for that turn on, I am grateful. peace

Sure Keith can play guitar this way. The voodoo brew/stew outtakes have plenty of fine examples. And Good times Bad times shows he could do it years before Love in Vain was recorded.

C

Really? I'll have to check those out. peace

Quote
liddas
Sure Keith can play guitar this way. The voodoo brew/stew outtakes have plenty of fine examples. And Good times Bad times shows he could do it years before Love in Vain was recorded.

C

Just listened to Good Time Bad Times and I assure you that the alternating thumb bass skills that Keb Mo is pulling off above, although seemingly simple, are nowhere to be found in Keith's playing on that song. Yes it is the same style music and a good tune but I unconvinced Keith has ever developed the skills to keep a decent bass line going with his thumb and play the rhythm and melody parts with his other fingers. The closest I've heard from Keith is a VERY loose approximation of it, imho. It is a style that you can't "sluff off" very effectively and Keith is king of sluff.

In fact hearing him talk about all the Jerry Reed songs he mastered as a youth made me wonder why I never heard him pull off that type of solo playing. The even more ancient art of weaving on a single fretboard performance. Maybe him AND Brian were able to do it together. lol

Maybe there are some better examples? I'd love to be educated. Post one of those outtakes you are referring to possibly. Thanks . peace

Some Keith acoustic-stuff here:

From Charlie is my darling:









From Voodoo Brew:













This one is a favourite







Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2012-09-21 10:31 by DandelionPowderman.

Quote
kowalski
Favourite version ever is the one from Tokyo '95. Their most 'soulful' version. And love how Charlie enters the song around 1:00...




(watch it in HD!)

I'm with you on that one. Would love to be able to go back in time and play this to Robert Johnson himself. Wonder what he'd of made of it? (Made of it - not 'off' it that is!)

The LIB version is a great version, no question there. But I prefer the '78 versions: a sort of punk-country-soul-garage band interpretation all rolled into one. I always found the Taylor versions somewhat boring, and not that it's his fault, the solos are great:; it just seems we're waiting for a guitar solo to gasp at. I always like in '78 how Wood used the Echoplex for the solo (except at JFK when it wasn't on but still sounded great). They rearranged it and it sounded great.