I heard that Brian was not a good songwriter but he did write a song called "Has Anybody Seen My Baby". Funny that Mick wrote a song with a similar title.

Quote
paulspendel
No. Jody Klein does not have to pay royalties to any of the Stones for the Sixties recordings. He owns all the rights.

With all due respect, that can't be right.
Very few musicians own the rights to their old (or first) recordings. The Beatles don't, never have. Its EMI (now owned by Universal I think). But all the Beatles product generates income for the surviving two and the widows. And still a very very good income.

Quote
jlowe

Quote
paulspendel
No. Jody Klein does not have to pay royalties to any of the Stones for the Sixties recordings. He owns all the rights.

With all due respect, that can't be right.
Very few musicians own the rights to their old (or first) recordings. The Beatles don't, never have. Its EMI (now owned by Universal I think). But all the Beatles product generates income for the surviving two and the widows. And still a very very good income.

ABKCO own the recordings and the publishing rights but they still have to pay royalties to the performers and songwriters.


"As we say in England, it can get a bit trainspottery"

Quote
2000 LYFH

Quote
jlowe

Quote
paulspendel
The Brian Jones estate is handled by an Oxford accountant. Brian's parents died in 2009/2011. His sister Barbara receives around 15000 pounds a year from air play royalties.

.....and £xxx per annum from ABKCO for his share of record royalties presumably?

Any idea why his (Five ?) children did/do not receive all royalties instead of his parents and now sister Barbara?

jlowe - what was the source for the info on Brian debts (£160k)? Any breakdown on this figure, that's a lot of money in 1969. I remember the story from a few years ago that a local store in his town was finally paid in full (40+ years late)...

1. Well Brian never paid for his children whilst he was alive did he?
He didn't leave a will....so his parents 'inherited'....a huge debt of course.
I guess the mothers of his children could have mounted a legal challenge but being illegitimate that might have been a problem, in 1969.

2. Details of Brian's finances were in the public domain, the figures being released about 10 months after he died. The majority of the debt must have been for unpaid tax (due to UK Inland Revenue). The ABKCO settlement of 1972 will have gone some way to paying this off, but clearly not all of it.

The real source is Clive Berger, the sollicitor that handled the estate. In 1981 the debt was cleared and Brian's dad decided to pay the Hartfield butcher and grocer. Brian's children have never been officially acknowledged.

I'm sorry but I can't see Brian getting a 100,000 pound lump sum from the Stones. That's just a story from the Sanchez book, I think. I don't think the Stones could have gotten their hands on that kind of ready cash, and if they could have, I don't see Jagger and company parting with that kind of money for Brian or anyone else. I see what Wyman is quoted as saying but I'm skeptical he even really said it. Now seeing how I wasn't there, I don't know, but I'm betting that the Jones estate ever got a penny of that lump sum, if it was ever agreed upon to begin with.

Quote
chatoyancy
I heard that Brian was not a good songwriter but he did write a song called "Has Anybody Seen My Baby". Funny that Mick wrote a song with a similar title.

He skipped "Has", though

This is something of a tangent, but it never occurred to me before that the two people who put the band together in the first place were both fired from it. That band is quite strange in so many ways.

Did they consider keeping him in the band, just hiring Mick Taylor to go out on the road and telling Brian, 'when you're together again come into the studio with us when we get back.'
Maybe contractually he would have been entitled to a fifth of their touring/future revenue unless they fired him.
Also it was that all-for-one, one-for-all thinking where the band was defined almost as a family unit. You couldn't do it part-time, like some later bands were set up.

Quote
wonderboy
Did they consider keeping him in the band, just hiring Mick Taylor to go out on the road and telling Brian, 'when you're together again come into the studio with us when we get back.'
Maybe contractually he would have been entitled to a fifth of their touring/future revenue unless they fired him.
Also it was that all-for-one, one-for-all thinking where the band was defined almost as a family unit. You couldn't do it part-time, like some later bands were set up.

I don't think so.

Brian wasn't happy with the musical direction the Stones were going, and the Stones-Keith for that matter- wanted to play with another full-time all-round guitar playing musician.
So Taylor was the right guy at the right time.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-07-22 22:21 by TheflyingDutchman.

Quote
blivet
This is something of a tangent, but it never occurred to me before that the two people who put the band together in the first place were both fired from it. That band is quite strange in so many ways.

Ian Stewart..
He was not fired, he continued working with the Stones.

It was a unique situation for him, but he accepted it.

Different from being 'fired'.

Quote
TheflyingDutchman

Quote
wonderboy
Did they consider keeping him in the band, just hiring Mick Taylor to go out on the road and telling Brian, 'when you're together again come into the studio with us when we get back.'
Maybe contractually he would have been entitled to a fifth of their touring/future revenue unless they fired him.
Also it was that all-for-one, one-for-all thinking where the band was defined almost as a family unit. You couldn't do it part-time, like some later bands were set up.

I don't think so.

Brian wasn't happy with the musical direction the Stones were going, and the Stones-Keith for that matter- wanted to play with another full-time all-round guitar playing musician.
So Taylor was the right guy at the right time.

Brian was happy with Child Of The Moon and eventually very happy with JJF. He also played on You Got The Silver and MR + many BB-songs.

I don't think we can say he was unhappy with the band's musical direction.

It is said that Brian didn't like the pop songs, yet he did contribute to the Rice Krispies jingle the Stones wrote. Rice Krispies literally has "pop" in its slogan. "Snap crackle pop". Do you hear a hint of blues in their jingle?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-07-22 22:57 by chatoyancy.

Quote
chatoyancy
It is said that Brian didn't like the pop songs, yet he did contribute to the Rice Krispies jingle the Stones wrote. Rice Krispies literally has "pop" in its slogan. "Snap crackle pop". Do you hear a hint of blues in their jingle?

Kind of Beach Boy-esque rhythm&blues/ pop.

Quote
From4tilLate
I'm sorry but I can't see Brian getting a 100,000 pound lump sum from the Stones. That's just a story from the Sanchez book, I think. I don't think the Stones could have gotten their hands on that kind of ready cash, and if they could have, I don't see Jagger and company parting with that kind of money for Brian or anyone else. I see what Wyman is quoted as saying but I'm skeptical he even really said it. Now seeing how I wasn't there, I don't know, but I'm betting that the Jones estate ever got a penny of that lump sum, if it was ever agreed upon to begin with.

Some of the Jones biographies say he was on the point of receiving a big pay out 'from the States' in the days before he died. It would have come from ABKCO who held the purse strings (very tightly) at the time. Given the size of his debts as confirmed in May 1970 the money was obviously not paid.
In May 1972 the group settled their lawsuit with ABKCO. For a fraction of the original claim of course. From memory the figure was around $2 million (1972 values).
The amount was split 50% record royalties 50% music publishing.
So Brian's Estate received 10% or so of the total.
Even then Brian lost out, presumably the Estate had to pay full UK taxes,at the time pretty steep.The others of course had slipped away from UK tax to whichever domicile they had at the time...France presumably?
I seem to recall Bill in his Stone Alone book claiming credit for making sure he and Charlie weren't scammed in the settlement.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
TheflyingDutchman

Quote
wonderboy
Did they consider keeping him in the band, just hiring Mick Taylor to go out on the road and telling Brian, 'when you're together again come into the studio with us when we get back.'
Maybe contractually he would have been entitled to a fifth of their touring/future revenue unless they fired him.
Also it was that all-for-one, one-for-all thinking where the band was defined almost as a family unit. You couldn't do it part-time, like some later bands were set up.

I don't think so.

Brian wasn't happy with the musical direction the Stones were going, and the Stones-Keith for that matter- wanted to play with another full-time all-round guitar playing musician.
So Taylor was the right guy at the right time.

Brian was happy with Child Of The Moon and eventually very happy with JJF. He also played on You Got The Silver and MR + many BB-songs.


I don't think we can say he was unhappy with the band's musical direction.

If I remember it well that were Brian's own words, and frankly I forgot where I read it, but I did. Fact is that Keith also stated that Brian slowly lost his appetite for playing the guitar from 1966 and onwards. We all know that Keith preferred a 2 guitar sound,-he didn't like to be the only guitarist- playing Blues& Rock with a bit flashy style (for the standards at that time) cause that type of music was in demand in the late 6-tees and seventies. So Brian was' not an option anymore, both musically and mentally I'm afraid. At least that's my take on it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-07-22 23:27 by TheflyingDutchman.

Quote
TheflyingDutchman

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
TheflyingDutchman

Quote
wonderboy
Did they consider keeping him in the band, just hiring Mick Taylor to go out on the road and telling Brian, 'when you're together again come into the studio with us when we get back.'
Maybe contractually he would have been entitled to a fifth of their touring/future revenue unless they fired him.
Also it was that all-for-one, one-for-all thinking where the band was defined almost as a family unit. You couldn't do it part-time, like some later bands were set up.

I don't think so.

Brian wasn't happy with the musical direction the Stones were going, and the Stones-Keith for that matter- wanted to play with another full-time all-round guitar playing musician.
So Taylor was the right guy at the right time.

Brian was happy with Child Of The Moon and eventually very happy with JJF. He also played on You Got The Silver and MR + many BB-songs.


I don't think we can say he was unhappy with the band's musical direction.

If I remember it well that were Brian's own words, and frankly I forgot where I read it, but I did. Fact is that Keith also stated that Brian slowly lost his appetite for playing the guitar from 1966 and onwards. We all know that Keith preferred a 2 guitar sound,-he didn't like to be the only guitarist- playing Blues& Rock with a bit flashy style (for the standards at that time) cause that type of music was in demand in the late 6-tees and seventies. So Brian was' not an option anymore, both musically and mentally I'm afraid. At least that's my take on it.

Okay, we're talking about two different things, then

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
TheflyingDutchman

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
TheflyingDutchman

Quote
wonderboy
Did they consider keeping him in the band, just hiring Mick Taylor to go out on the road and telling Brian, 'when you're together again come into the studio with us when we get back.'
Maybe contractually he would have been entitled to a fifth of their touring/future revenue unless they fired him.
Also it was that all-for-one, one-for-all thinking where the band was defined almost as a family unit. You couldn't do it part-time, like some later bands were set up.

I don't think so.

Brian wasn't happy with the musical direction the Stones were going, and the Stones-Keith for that matter- wanted to play with another full-time all-round guitar playing musician.
So Taylor was the right guy at the right time.

Brian was happy with Child Of The Moon and eventually very happy with JJF. He also played on You Got The Silver and MR + many BB-songs.


I don't think we can say he was unhappy with the band's musical direction.

If I remember it well that were Brian's own words, and frankly I forgot where I read it, but I did. Fact is that Keith also stated that Brian slowly lost his appetite for playing the guitar from 1966 and onwards. We all know that Keith preferred a 2 guitar sound,-he didn't like to be the only guitarist- playing Blues& Rock with a bit flashy style (for the standards at that time) cause that type of music was in demand in the late 6-tees and seventies. So Brian was' not an option anymore, both musically and mentally I'm afraid. At least that's my take on it.

Okay, we're talking about two different things, then

No, there's at least an overlap. Brian wanted to begin a band of his own, also had plans to form a super group with John Lennon? Besides he was more interested in "exotic" instruments. Can you Imagine the Stones paying "UMT" in Hydepark with Marimbas, or Ruby Tuesday with Brian playing the flute? No disrespect towards him, but times were becoming different. Jimmi Hendrix, Santana, Led Zeppelin, DeepPurple etc were hot. The Stones needed a different and more up to date sound, certainly on stage, imo.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-07-23 00:24 by TheflyingDutchman.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-07-23 01:17 by schillid.

Quote
TheflyingDutchman

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
TheflyingDutchman

Quote
wonderboy
Did they consider keeping him in the band, just hiring Mick Taylor to go out on the road and telling Brian, 'when you're together again come into the studio with us when we get back.'
Maybe contractually he would have been entitled to a fifth of their touring/future revenue unless they fired him.
Also it was that all-for-one, one-for-all thinking where the band was defined almost as a family unit. You couldn't do it part-time, like some later bands were set up.

I don't think so.

Brian wasn't happy with the musical direction the Stones were going, and the Stones-Keith for that matter- wanted to play with another full-time all-round guitar playing musician.
So Taylor was the right guy at the right time.

Brian was happy with Child Of The Moon and eventually very happy with JJF. He also played on You Got The Silver and MR + many BB-songs.


I don't think we can say he was unhappy with the band's musical direction.

If I remember it well that were Brian's own words, and frankly I forgot where I read it, but I did. Fact is that Keith also stated that Brian slowly lost his appetite for playing the guitar from 1966 and onwards. We all know that Keith preferred a 2 guitar sound,-he didn't like to be the only guitarist- playing Blues& Rock with a bit flashy style (for the standards at that time) cause that type of music was in demand in the late 6-tees and seventies. So Brian was' not an option anymore, both musically and mentally I'm afraid. At least that's my take on it.

Didn't his official statement on leaving the band say something like "I no longer see eye to eye with the others about the discs we are cutting" (quoting from memory)? Not that I think those are necessarily his real feelings so much as a rationalization for the press, but it might be where the idea of his not being happy with the band's direction came from.

Quote
schillid

><><><

"The more I hear Jumping Jack the more I realize I was wrong (to think Child of the Moon was the more commercial side). It has that same appeal as Satisfaction and now I'm really getting to love it - it really is a gas, gas, gas!"

- Brian Jones, May 1968

From timeisonourside.com

I'm not stating that Brian was sacked because the Stones needed a more flashy player. He was sacked because he wasn't functioning anymore. Let that be crystal clear.

[www.youtube.com]



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2017-07-23 14:13 by TheflyingDutchman.

Quote
TheflyingDutchman
I'm not stating that Brian was sacked because the Stones needed a more flashy player. He was sacked because he wasn't functioning anymore. Let that be crystal clear.

[www.youtube.com]

That is a fact. But Brian being unhappy with the band's music in 1968 and 1969, shortly before he was sacked, sounds more speculative than factual to me.

He did say something about not being happy with their pop-period earlier, though, if memory serves.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
TheflyingDutchman
I'm not stating that Brian was sacked because the Stones needed a more flashy player. He was sacked because he wasn't functioning anymore. Let that be crystal clear.

[www.youtube.com]

That is a fact. But Brian being unhappy with the band's music in 1968 and 1969, shortly before he was sacked, sounds more speculative than factual to me.

He did say something about not being happy with their pop-period earlier, though, if memory serves.

The best about Brian's inspiration I could bring up is the clip I posted coming from his bandmates. Both Keith and Jagger are pointing in that direction. I think Keith was the most determined of them, he even doesn't express any feelings about it. Jagger and Watts did. Bill was absent..



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-07-23 17:55 by TheflyingDutchman.

Brian's last known interview...


[iorr.org]

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
Amsterdamned
Jones 7 years, Taylor 5 years, Wood 37 years. What's Ron's secret?

Lil correction.

Thanks HM, that was the interview I referred too. I knew it was in the back of my senile mind somewhere.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2017-07-23 20:33 by TheflyingDutchman.

Quote
Amsterdamned
Jones 7 years, Taylor 5 years, Wood 37 years. What's Ron's secret?

Ronnie was 27 or 28 when he joined, so one factor was a certain level of maturity. He had been in the music game for a decade -- knew what he wanted, and accepted his role.