Do you guys believe the Rolling Stones will take a page from Def Leppard and go into the studio to re-record some of their old songs (and those re-recordings would have to sound as original as can be) to ward off record company royalties regarding the use of their songs in licensing and digital downloading?

The Def Leppard story on record label problems and their decision to re-record, or "forge," two songs (and later the whole of their 1987 LP, Hysteria) can be found here, for example:
[www.billboard.com]

Again, will our fearless foursome (since 1993) return to the studio, with original bassist Bill Wyman, and "forge" such songs as "(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction" (hopefully with the horns like Keith wanted the first time around), "Paint It Black," "Brown Sugar" and "Start Me Up" to ward off ABKCO and EMI?

As the late "quiet Beatle" George Harrison once (jokingly) sang, "Beware of ABKCO."

~Ben



Edited 7 time(s). Last edit at 2014-01-29 07:46 by BrianJones1969.

No. That ship has sailed. But it was a realistic option in the years leading up to "40 Licks". It had definitely been discussed in the Stones camp that if no suitable agreement with ABKCO could be reached they would re-record all ABKCO-controlled material for this 40th Anniversary "Greatest Hits" sampler, true to the originals,and that means NOTE FOR NOTE. It was not just a threat - they would have done it. Nowadays, relations between the band and ABKCO are much, much better so there's basically no need for such a move.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-01-29 04:18 by alimente.

Forge?

Hope not ..........



ROCKMAN

They have a lot of live versions of Jumping Jack Flash on iTunes already (Hyde Park, Shine A Light, Flashpoint, etc.)

Quote
alimente
No. That ship has sailed. But it was a realistic option in the years leading up to "40 Licks". It had definitely been discussed in the Stones camp that if no suitable agreement with ABKCO could be reached they would re-record all ABKCO-controlled material for this 40th Anniversary "Greatest Hits" sampler, true to the originals,and that means NOTE FOR NOTE. It was not just a threat - they would have done it. Nowadays, relations between the band and ABKCO are much, much better so there's basically no need for such a move.

Really? It drives me nuts to buy a Best-Of, only to discover that one of your favourite tracks has been re-recorded.

Quote
Big Al

Quote
alimente
No. That ship has sailed. But it was a realistic option in the years leading up to "40 Licks". It had definitely been discussed in the Stones camp that if no suitable agreement with ABKCO could be reached they would re-record all ABKCO-controlled material for this 40th Anniversary "Greatest Hits" sampler, true to the originals,and that means NOTE FOR NOTE. It was not just a threat - they would have done it. Nowadays, relations between the band and ABKCO are much, much better so there's basically no need for such a move.

Really? It drives me nuts to buy a Best-Of, only to discover that one of your favourite tracks has been re-recorded.

Really! Virgin Records was the driving force behind this. They wanted a career-spanning "best of" for their 40th Anniversary campaign and that outruled another compilation starting with "Brown Sugar". The Stones-Virgin camp was VERY determined at having either ABKCO on board at financially suitable terms or showing them the dirty finger by re-recording the pre-1971, ABKCO-controlled hits from scratch.

Of course, we all know what the outcome was - 40 Licks, the first-ever release release that contained ABKCO-material as well as 1971 and onwards tracks. Thankfully, both parties could reach an agreement. Personally, I would not like a band of the Stones stature to record note-for-note identical remakes of classic tracks. It just doesn't suit them. But I understand their motives at the times very well - it would have been a move to cut through the legal knots and put immense pressure on ABKCO to either cooperate or face the danger of a degrading commercial value of their (original) Stones recordings.

Actually, it would have sounded interesting, how would they have done it - a note for note version of AFTERMATH, etc.

- Doxa

Sorry I would prefer some new material ...

Quote
Doxa
Actually, it would have sounded interesting, how would they have done it - a note for note version of AFTERMATH, etc.

- Doxa

Interesting indeed, it would have been!!!

Note for note? That's alimente's take on what "True to the originals" means. It's such an open thing. Could easily be nothing more than recording the songs again with same type of arrangments. Wild Horses and Love In Vain from stripped would fit that.

It relates only to the songs planned for 40 licks.

They would never have managed note for note recreations and I bet they never said they could.





Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2014-01-29 20:38 by His Majesty.

Donovan had to record new versions of Colours and Catch The wind for his 1969 greatest hits comp.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-01-29 20:56 by His Majesty.

I hope not Toooooooo ................

__________________________

Quote
His Majesty
Donovan had to record new versions of Colours and Catch The wind for his 1969 greatest hits comp.

But only for the American version of his Greatest Hits issued by Epic.
Those two songs had been issued in America on the Hickory label.
The UK version issued on Pye included the originals.
The American CD reissue on Epic also included the original recordings.


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

How odd. I can't even imagine this current group of Stones being able to recreate old material in a reasonably sound-a-like form. I remember those dreadful Little Richard and Chuck Berry 'Greatest Hits' packages that re-recorded their old songs.

I wonder what their relationship with Jody Klein is now? I don't remember any of the Stones giving one interview to promote Charlie Is My Darling, The Ed Sullivan Show, or the recent Live 1965. I would think all of the original Stones, and their estates, would have to prosper in some way from these releases with mechanical royalties at least. If that is so, then it would make sense for them to promote these products.

I scoured the Crossfire Hurricane DVD and didn't find one reference to ABKCO or Jody Klein and yet they use music in the documentary I would think would be covered by ABKCO.

Quote
24FPS
How odd. I can't even imagine this current group of Stones being able to recreate old material in a reasonably sound-a-like form. I remember those dreadful Little Richard and Chuck Berry 'Greatest Hits' packages that re-recorded their old songs.

I wonder what their relationship with Jody Klein is now? I don't remember any of the Stones giving one interview to promote Charlie Is My Darling, The Ed Sullivan Show, or the recent Live 1965. I would think all of the original Stones, and their estates, would have to prosper in some way from these releases with mechanical royalties at least. If that is so, then it would make sense for them to promote these products.

I scoured the Crossfire Hurricane DVD and didn't find one reference to ABKCO or Jody Klein and yet they use music in the documentary I would think would be covered by ABKCO.

That's a very interesting observation. I've just done the same with the "Sweet Summer Sun" DVD/CD package and there are no songwriting or publishing credits.


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

Quote
His Majesty
Note for note? That's alimente's take on what "True to the originals" means. It's such an open thing. Could easily be nothing more than recording the songs again with same type of arrangments. Wild Horses and Love In Vain from stripped would fit that.

It relates only to the songs planned for 40 licks.

They would never have managed note for note recreations and I bet they never said they could.

Rubbish. That's not "my take on what true to the originals means". How can you turn my words around and feel the need to interpret what I'm saying when what I was saying were in fact exactly the words of the information I was given by a Virgin managing director at the time? He said "note for note" and I have no reason to doubt it.

On top of that, new arrangements of old classic hits don't exactly make sense in the context of a career-spanning compilation, even less when 1971 and onwards-tracks would have been the orginal recordings and no remakes.

A totally different question, however, is if the Stones of the 90's were actually capable of recreating old performances of the 60's, performance- and, last but not least, soundwise. I have my doubts, but then again I believe that with all these professionals around them and the most expensive studio trickery at their hands, they could have at least delivered remakes close enough to the originals to satisfy a large percentage of the mainstream audience this compilation was aimed at - apart from us hardcore fans, obviously.

@Doxa: Re-recording entire albums like Aftermath was never the point - talks centered around a handful of 60's hits, like the ones featured on Disc 1 of "40 Licks".



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2014-01-29 23:13 by alimente.

Easy tiger, it didn't come across that the "note for note" came from someone at Virgin.

The stones making note for note recreations is practically impossible. What ever virgins expectations, they would not have gotten note for note recreations.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2014-01-30 04:29 by His Majesty.

In 1994 the SHADOWS have already re-recorded note to note their great 60's tracks after passing (acrimoniously) from EMI to Polydor....(identical 95%)

Quote
jp.M
In 1994 the SHADOWS have already re-recorded note to note their great 60's tracks after passing (acrimoniously) from EMI to Polydor....(identical 95%)

Obviously different recordings.

95% is just a number pulled out of the air.

Re-recorded hits ---- No No No avoid 'em like the plague



ROCKMAN

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
jp.M
In 1994 the SHADOWS have already re-recorded note to note their great 60's tracks after passing (acrimoniously) from EMI to Polydor....(identical 95%)

Obviously different recordings.

95% is just a number pulled out of the air.

Apache original, 1960:




Apache re-recorded in 1989:




Close, but no cigar.


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

Quote
24FPS
How odd. I can't even imagine this current group of Stones being able to recreate old material in a reasonably sound-a-like form. I remember those dreadful Little Richard and Chuck Berry 'Greatest Hits' packages that re-recorded their old songs.

I wonder what their relationship with Jody Klein is now? I don't remember any of the Stones giving one interview to promote Charlie Is My Darling, The Ed Sullivan Show, or the recent Live 1965. I would think all of the original Stones, and their estates, would have to prosper in some way from these releases with mechanical royalties at least. If that is so, then it would make sense for them to promote these products.

I scoured the Crossfire Hurricane DVD and didn't find one reference to ABKCO or Jody Klein and yet they use music in the documentary I would think would be covered by ABKCO.

It's been said many times. Their relationship is very good. It all started with an agreement in 1989. The Stones does maybe not give interviews to promote ABKCO's products, but they will have to give the green light to make it happen. Every ABKCO release is authorised by the Stones. How did Exile Deluxe happen? Some of the tracks were ABKCO material, so there wasn't obviously a problem there to use it. I remember an interview in IORR magazine, were Jody Klein said that the coorporation between ABKCO and Stones were just fine indeed. It's not 1971 anymore. Things have moved on.

Quote
Blueranger
I remember an interview in IORR magazine, were Jody Klein said that the coorporation between ABKCO and Stones were just fine indeed. It's not 1971 anymore. Things have moved on.

I think there's a difference between Jody Klein saying everything is hunky dory and the Stones themselves saying it.

It's hunky dory enough for some ace things to have been released.

Quote
His Majesty
It's hunky dory enough for some ace things to have been released.

True, true. Still, it's strange with the absence of promotion for ABKCO products they stand to profit from. Increased promotion could mean increased sales. It's not like them to ignore profits.

Quote
24FPS

Quote
His Majesty
It's hunky dory enough for some ace things to have been released.

True, true. Still, it's strange with the absence of promotion for ABKCO products they stand to profit from. Increased promotion could mean increased sales. It's not like them to ignore profits.

Would it really make a huge difference in sales and profits? The real money is in their live shows these days, and it's not that archive live recordings could sell millions of copies if only the band gets more involved in promotions.

Quote
alimente

Quote
24FPS

Quote
His Majesty
It's hunky dory enough for some ace things to have been released.

True, true. Still, it's strange with the absence of promotion for ABKCO products they stand to profit from. Increased promotion could mean increased sales. It's not like them to ignore profits.

Would it really make a huge difference in sales and profits? The real money is in their live shows these days, and it's not that archive live recordings could sell millions of copies if only the band gets more involved in promotions.

The Stones, at this point, are like star athletes nearing the end of their run. They will pick up every penny they can, while they can, knowing the spigot of cash will soon close to a trickle. The profits these products generate may seem miniscule to a night of stadium blasting of tired hits, but they do plug those gaps when they're not touring. And, these products help gin up interest in the band when they're out of the spotlight. Notice they sure as hell promoted the downloads of Brussels and other concerts. (It might have been part of their agreement with whoever underwrote that project).

They may not sell a lot of copies of Rock & Roll Circus, or Charlie Is My Darling, or whatever. But I'm sure the entire catalogue taken as a whole must still be greatly enriching ABKCO (and the Stones), or else we wouldn't be seeing new product. Apparently there was enough interest in Charlie Is My Darling to warrant the download product 'LIVE '65'. As far as I know this is the first download only ABKCO product. They probably got jealous after the Stones own downloads, concerts ABKCO probably did not participate in profit wise. (I don't think they have publishing royalties, only master tapes usage for pre-1971 material?)

The good thing for us old farts who are very interested in archival material is that ABKCO seems to be very interested in getting this material out. If the current download of 'LIVE 65' does well, maybe they'll start scrambling to find listenable tapes for something like Paris '67.

Of course, if the time comes for the Stones to re-record "Jumpin' Jack Flash" and "Street Fighting Man" the overdriven acoustic guitar part is most difficult since no audiocassette player can duplicate the trickery of the old Philips EL2203 unit.

~Ben

Quote
24FPS

Quote
alimente

Quote
24FPS

Quote
His Majesty
It's hunky dory enough for some ace things to have been released.

True, true. Still, it's strange with the absence of promotion for ABKCO products they stand to profit from. Increased promotion could mean increased sales. It's not like them to ignore profits.

Would it really make a huge difference in sales and profits? The real money is in their live shows these days, and it's not that archive live recordings could sell millions of copies if only the band gets more involved in promotions.

The Stones, at this point, are like star athletes nearing the end of their run. They will pick up every penny they can, while they can, knowing the spigot of cash will soon close to a trickle. The profits these products generate may seem miniscule to a night of stadium blasting of tired hits, but they do plug those gaps when they're not touring. And, these products help gin up interest in the band when they're out of the spotlight. Notice they sure as hell promoted the downloads of Brussels and other concerts. (It might have been part of their agreement with whoever underwrote that project).

They may not sell a lot of copies of Rock & Roll Circus, or Charlie Is My Darling, or whatever. But I'm sure the entire catalogue taken as a whole must still be greatly enriching ABKCO (and the Stones), or else we wouldn't be seeing new product. Apparently there was enough interest in Charlie Is My Darling to warrant the download product 'LIVE '65'. As far as I know this is the first download only ABKCO product. They probably got jealous after the Stones own downloads, concerts ABKCO probably did not participate in profit wise. (I don't think they have publishing royalties, only master tapes usage for pre-1971 material?)

The good thing for us old farts who are very interested in archival material is that ABKCO seems to be very interested in getting this material out. If the current download of 'LIVE 65' does well, maybe they'll start scrambling to find listenable tapes for something like Paris '67.

I read here that this concert recording was also available on the Charlie... box set.