Townshend etc. may have sung on Sway without their contributions being used...

Quote
PhillyFAN

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Santana did some of that stuff the year before, Mike. I'm sure there were others as well - mixing in some latin and jazz in their rock solos, like Taylor did here.

Good stuff, but nothing groundbreaking or earth-shattering about it, imo. But indeed a taste of what to come on SF and IORR.

Amen to that. Santana was already blazing those trails and introduced Latino flavor to Rock n Roll.

They certainly did but no one in Europe would have heard it before the first Santana album came out in Sept 1969. If anyone inspired Mick Taylor here it would probably have been Gabor Szabo, the guitarist who influenced Carlos Santana.

Here's the original of Gypsy Queen one of the standout tracks on Santana - Abraxas.

Quote
2000 LYFH

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
Maindefender
Great song from their best album. Has Keith ever talked about his limited involvement? Did he take a musical direction role even though he didn't play? His background vocals are outstanding.....

I heard that Pete Townshend and Ronnie Lane contributed to the background vocals as well, although not listed in the credits above.

peace

PT sings on Slave. Ronnie Lane on In Another Land (with Marriot).

Haven't heard about those two contributing to anything else on Stones records.

Well, not me either, but timeisonourside.com claims - I just noticed - that background vocals are done by Mick Jagger, Keith Richards, Pete Townshend, Ronnie Lane & Billy Nicholls. Total news to me, since my ears only tend to hear Jagger and Richards, and it has never occurred to me that there could be anyone else. Probably time to give it another listen.

- Doxa

From the book "The Faces : Had Me a Real Good Time" [books.google.com]

"This Day in Music" states the same: [www.thisdayinmusic.com]

Also, Roy Carr's book "The Rolling Stones an illustrated record", states Townshend and Lane were on back-up vocals on Sticky Fingers, but does not state which songs!

There are lots of internet sources listing Pete Townshend and Ronnie Lane as backup vocalists on Sway. It could be a case of one source getting it wrong and others copying the misinformation, especially since no such credits were on the liner notes.

But the vocals on the chorus are just dense enough that I'm not ruling out the possibility. Hopefully one of the Stones academics here can clear it up. Thanks.

[en.wikipedia.org]

[www.songfacts.com]

[www.rollingstone.com]

[www.last.fm]

peace

Personnel/Band Members and Musicians on: ROLLING STONES - Sticky Fingers CBS NL
Band-members, Musicians and Performers
Mick Jagger – lead vocals, acoustic guitar on "Dead Flowers", electric guitar on "Sway", percussion
Keith Richards – electric guitar, six and twelve string acoustic guitar, backing vocals
Mick Taylor – electric, acoustic and slide guitar (not present during "Sister Morphine" sessions)
Charlie Watts – drums
Bill Wyman – bass guitar, electric piano on "You Gotta Move"
Bobby Keys – saxophone
Ian Stewart – piano on "Brown Sugar" and "Dead Flowers"
Nicky Hopkins – piano on "Sway"
Jim Dickinson – piano on "Wild Horses"
Billy Preston – organ on "Can't You Hear Me Knocking" and "I Got the Blues"
Rocky Dijon – congas on "Can't You Hear Me Knocking"
Ry Cooder – slide guitar on "Sister Morphine"
Jack Nitzsche – piano on "Sister Morphine"
Jim Price – trumpet, piano on "Moonlight Mile"
Paul Buckmaster – string arrangement on "Sway" and "Moonlight Mile"
Jimmy Miller – percussion
Pete Townshend – backing vocals on "Sway"
Ronnie Lane – backing vocals on "Sway"
Billy Nicholls – backing vocals on "Sway"

Quote
PhillyFAN

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Santana did some of that stuff the year before, Mike. I'm sure there were others as well - mixing in some latin and jazz in their rock solos, like Taylor did here.

Good stuff, but nothing groundbreaking or earth-shattering about it, imo. But indeed a taste of what to come on SF and IORR.

Amen to that. Santana was already blazing those trails and introduced Latino flavor to Rock n Roll. I think it was somewhat different and refreshing hearing it from an English rock and blues band - the Stones.

Damn it looks it is tough for you guys to give Taylor some credit...

- Doxa

Quote
Doxa

Quote
PhillyFAN

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Santana did some of that stuff the year before, Mike. I'm sure there were others as well - mixing in some latin and jazz in their rock solos, like Taylor did here.

Good stuff, but nothing groundbreaking or earth-shattering about it, imo. But indeed a taste of what to come on SF and IORR.

Amen to that. Santana was already blazing those trails and introduced Latino flavor to Rock n Roll. I think it was somewhat different and refreshing hearing it from an English rock and blues band - the Stones.

Damn it looks it is tough for you guys to give Taylor some credit...

- Doxa

Can't forget Steven Stills early blending of latino stuff and rock. But comparing all these guitarists in those terms is kinda pointless. Each had their own style, and almost all guitarists eventually explore latino/spanish phrasing. That's where it all began.

And jazz phrasing is a natural progression for most guitarists as well. Taylor went there for a while but has seemed to gravitate back to his blues roots.

peace

Quote
Silver Dagger

Quote
PhillyFAN

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Santana did some of that stuff the year before, Mike. I'm sure there were others as well - mixing in some latin and jazz in their rock solos, like Taylor did here.

Good stuff, but nothing groundbreaking or earth-shattering about it, imo. But indeed a taste of what to come on SF and IORR.

Amen to that. Santana was already blazing those trails and introduced Latino flavor to Rock n Roll.

They certainly did but no one in Europe would have heard it before the first Santana album came out in Sept 1969. If anyone inspired Mick Taylor here it would probably have been Gabor Szabo, the guitarist who influenced Carlos Santana.

Interesting info, Silver Dagger. Didn't know that Szabo part. Could very well be Taylor's influence. I've been lately listening to Taylor's pre-Stones stuff, and if one compares that into what he would be doing soon with the Stones, there is an interesting artistic development going on. He really kept his ears open, and was progressing his art. The fluidy Albert King of Mayall School transformed into this fusion/latino influenced melodic player, pretty much giving especially STICKY FINGERS its elegant flavor.

When I think of Taylor's contribution into the Stones, I think the reason why he was chosen, and what he was there initially supposed to do, and be like, is the solo in "Jiving Sister Fanny", one of the first things he did with the Stones. That's as typical British blues guitar god stuff as it can be. But like noted here, there would be new things to come, and I salute the "I'm Free" observation made here (didn't thought it in those terms before). As he was more integrated to the band, he seemingly sounded more confident to offer new ideas/develop his playing. Both the band and him gained of that, and we all can enjoy the results, especially in STICKY FINGERS.

- Doxa



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2015-01-06 21:50 by Doxa.

Quote
Naturalust


Can't forget Steven Stills early blending of latino stuff and rock. But comparing all these guitarists in those terms is kinda pointless. Each had their own style, and almost all guitarists eventually explore latino/spanish phrasing. That's where it all began.

And jazz phrasing is a natural progression for most guitarists as well. Taylor went there for a while but has seemed to gravitate back to his blues roots.

peace

Yeah, good points. There were lots of things going on those days, and we are here talking about a guy who just turned into his twenties, whose career already then sounded like a dream come true to any of his generation of players. And the world simply loved flashy lead guitarists back then. The picture I have of him from those days is that he also was damn ambitious musically. Unfortunately or not, he sounded like losing some of that later in his career, due to many reasons (rather soon, actually). A classical case of 'too much, too soon', one could say...

- Doxa

Quote
Doxa

Damn it looks it is tough for you guys to give Taylor some credit...

- Doxa

Yes that's the rule. He didnt write anything at all. Nor did Brian Jones, Ry Cooder or anybody else. Except for Mick and Keith and Ronnie. They are the good guys.

Quote
Redhotcarpet

Quote
Doxa

Damn it looks it is tough for you guys to give Taylor some credit...

- Doxa

Yes that's the rule. He didnt write anything at all. Nor did Brian Jones, Ry Cooder or anybody else. Except for Mick and Keith and Ronnie. They are the good guys.

Well you don't hear Charlie complaining about his lack of writing credits......

peace

Quote
Redhotcarpet

Quote
Doxa

Damn it looks it is tough for you guys to give Taylor some credit...

- Doxa

Yes that's the rule. He didnt write anything at all. Nor did Brian Jones, Ry Cooder or anybody else. Except for Mick and Keith and Ronnie. They are the good guys.

Taylor complained about two or three songs, Cooder none. That's it...

Quote
Doxa

Quote
PhillyFAN

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Santana did some of that stuff the year before, Mike. I'm sure there were others as well - mixing in some latin and jazz in their rock solos, like Taylor did here.

Good stuff, but nothing groundbreaking or earth-shattering about it, imo. But indeed a taste of what to come on SF and IORR.

Amen to that. Santana was already blazing those trails and introduced Latino flavor to Rock n Roll. I think it was somewhat different and refreshing hearing it from an English rock and blues band - the Stones.

Damn it looks it is tough for you guys to give Taylor some credit...

- Doxa

I thought "good stuff" was a positive remark?

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Doxa

Quote
PhillyFAN

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Santana did some of that stuff the year before, Mike. I'm sure there were others as well - mixing in some latin and jazz in their rock solos, like Taylor did here.

Good stuff, but nothing groundbreaking or earth-shattering about it, imo. But indeed a taste of what to come on SF and IORR.

Amen to that. Santana was already blazing those trails and introduced Latino flavor to Rock n Roll. I think it was somewhat different and refreshing hearing it from an English rock and blues band - the Stones.

Damn it looks it is tough for you guys to give Taylor some credit...

- Doxa

I thought "good stuff" was a positive remark?

positive when it comes from Dandie...

MT's solo(s) makes the song...

GOOSE BUMPS

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Dreamer

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Title5Take1

Quote
Doxa

Another, more recent Taylor quote from 2011 (timeisonourside.com again):

I added my solo to Sway, but it's very much Mick's song. I don't think Keith's on it. It had a great, loose feel. Mick played rhythm guitar on that. He's a great rhythm player. My theory is he has a natural feel and that's also why he's such a great dancer.

- Doxa

I totally agree with MT above, but here's Keith in GUITAR WORLD:

GUITAR WORLD: "How do you rate Mick Jagger as a guitar player?"

KEITH: "On acoustic, he's a damned good rhythm player. I'd never let him play electric if I could help it... ... No sense of electric at all..."

GW: "SWAY is Mick on electric."

KEITH: "Yeah... Well, like I say, acoustically he's got a nice touch. It doesn't translate electrically. It's not his thing. It's not everybody's cup of tea."

I think Keith is referring to Mick's choice of sound, which generally is a bit iffy, imo. Sway, Some Girls and Stop Breakin' Down are exceptions, though.

Always liked this interview: good journalist. And this part is brilliant: the fearless pirate is caught loaded with fear & jealousy and talking bs.

How? Sounds like a quick rebound to me.

To me Keith is pushed into a corner a bit, and if pushed a bit more, he would have contradicted himself. For him, unlike for DandiePowderman, "Sway" it is not an exception, but, actually, as he says, an example of what he just claimed, that is, how lousy Jagger is ("no sense of electric at all"). This begs the question that why on earth Keith let that piece of crap to released in the first place? If he thought that was such terrible, why didn't he do something about it? Wasn't this the guy who supposedly spent nights and nights in the studio to make sure that the feel and sound in a particulal track is just right? Either Keith wasn't any longer interested or he didn't have a say. I think neither is something he would admit (Keith not interested how the main guitar sounds like in a Rolling Stones recording, or didn't have any longer power to vote against). Instead I suggest that he - like anybody - back then saw it being perfectly alright, and is lying now to be 'consistent'...

Anyway, my guess is that Keith speaks in a very general level there, and if there is any particular reference he has in his mind (Jagger's electric guitar playing as a some sort of problem), that is SOME GIRLS era and the 'three guitar attack' back then. From that period I recall Keith saying something to the effect that Jagger needed to be turned down, because he was messing too much, or something. Somehow I see the point how an over-eager, punk-influenced amateur, with probably no any any sense for nuances (but for volume), might have gone to old pro's nerves back then... Before that when Jagger rarely played electric guitar in a Stones track, it was usually - or maybe even always - when Keith was not around; namely, especially in 1970 Richards acquired the habit of missing sessions. From Stargroves we have backing tracks done for such Jagger/Taylor guitar collaborations as "Sway" and "Stop Breaking Down". "Moonlight Mile" belongs to list, even though Jagger 'only' plays acoustic.

So the way I see Keith's "Sway" comment is that the baby is thrown out with birth-water; a wonderful opportunity to bash Jagger - the very need to share this surprising 'revelation' of Jagger's skills (man's who foremost is not very well-known as any sort of guitarist) - is not wasted, and goes beyond anything else.

- Doxa



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2015-01-07 04:24 by Doxa.

Quote
Eleanor Rigby

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Doxa

Quote
PhillyFAN

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Santana did some of that stuff the year before, Mike. I'm sure there were others as well - mixing in some latin and jazz in their rock solos, like Taylor did here.

Good stuff, but nothing groundbreaking or earth-shattering about it, imo. But indeed a taste of what to come on SF and IORR.

Amen to that. Santana was already blazing those trails and introduced Latino flavor to Rock n Roll. I think it was somewhat different and refreshing hearing it from an English rock and blues band - the Stones.

Damn it looks it is tough for you guys to give Taylor some credit...

- Doxa

I thought "good stuff" was a positive remark?

positive when it comes from Dandie...

MT's solo(s) makes the song...

Taylor didn't play on the original song we discussed above (I'm Free) - hence he's not making the song, although he added some good stuff to it live as I wrote.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Silver Dagger

Quote
PhillyFAN

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Santana did some of that stuff the year before, Mike. I'm sure there were others as well - mixing in some latin and jazz in their rock solos, like Taylor did here.

Good stuff, but nothing groundbreaking or earth-shattering about it, imo. But indeed a taste of what to come on SF and IORR.

Amen to that. Santana was already blazing those trails and introduced Latino flavor to Rock n Roll.

They certainly did but no one in Europe would have heard it before the first Santana album came out in Sept 1969. If anyone inspired Mick Taylor here it would probably have been Gabor Szabo, the guitarist who influenced Carlos Santana.

Interesting info, Silver Dagger. Didn't know that Szabo part. Could very well be Taylor's influence. I've been lately listening to Taylor's pre-Stones stuff, and if one compares that into what he would be doing soon with the Stones, there is an interesting artistic development going on. He really kept his ears open, and was progressing his art. The fluidy Albert King of Mayall School transformed into this fusion/latino influenced melodic player, pretty much giving especially STICKY FINGERS its elegant flavor.

When I think of Taylor's contribution into the Stones, I think the reason why he was chosen, and what he was there initially supposed to do, and be like, is the solo in "Jiving Sister Fanny", one of the first things he did with the Stones. That's as typical British blues guitar god stuff as it can be. But like noted here, there would be new things to come, and I salute the "I'm Free" observation made here (didn't thought it in those terms before). As he was more integrated to the band, he seemingly sounded more confident to offer new ideas/develop his playing. Both the band and him gained of that, and we all can enjoy the results, especially in STICKY FINGERS.

- Doxa

Doxa - if you want to explore more of Mick Taylor's extra-curricular Stones work he helped jazz flautist Herbie Mann in late 73 on the great London Underground album including this great version of Bitch. The album is well worth checking out - there are covers of Layla, Paper Sun by Traffic, You Never Give Me Your Money and Thunderclap Newman's Something In The Air.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Eleanor Rigby

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Doxa

Quote
PhillyFAN

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Santana did some of that stuff the year before, Mike. I'm sure there were others as well - mixing in some latin and jazz in their rock solos, like Taylor did here.

Good stuff, but nothing groundbreaking or earth-shattering about it, imo. But indeed a taste of what to come on SF and IORR.

Amen to that. Santana was already blazing those trails and introduced Latino flavor to Rock n Roll. I think it was somewhat different and refreshing hearing it from an English rock and blues band - the Stones.

Damn it looks it is tough for you guys to give Taylor some credit...

- Doxa

I thought "good stuff" was a positive remark?

positive when it comes from Dandie...

MT's solo(s) makes the song...

Taylor didn't play on the original song we discussed above (I'm Free) - hence he's not making the song, although he added some good stuff to it live as I wrote.

Actually, I'm just listening to this solo again and there's nothing Santanarish/Latin about it at all. It's just a normal solo with some nice vibrato on it. In the great scheme of Stones things it's not that earth shattering.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-01-07 11:44 by Silver Dagger.

Quote
Silver Dagger

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Eleanor Rigby

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Doxa

Quote
PhillyFAN

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Santana did some of that stuff the year before, Mike. I'm sure there were others as well - mixing in some latin and jazz in their rock solos, like Taylor did here.

Good stuff, but nothing groundbreaking or earth-shattering about it, imo. But indeed a taste of what to come on SF and IORR.

Amen to that. Santana was already blazing those trails and introduced Latino flavor to Rock n Roll. I think it was somewhat different and refreshing hearing it from an English rock and blues band - the Stones.

Damn it looks it is tough for you guys to give Taylor some credit...

- Doxa

I thought "good stuff" was a positive remark?

positive when it comes from Dandie...

MT's solo(s) makes the song...

Taylor didn't play on the original song we discussed above (I'm Free) - hence he's not making the song, although he added some good stuff to it live as I wrote.

Actually, I'm just listening to this solo again and there's nothing Santarish/Latin about it at all. It's just a normal solo with some nice vibrato on it. In the great scheme of Stones things it's not that earth shattering.

It's true that the Ya Yas-solo is one of the least jazz/latin-influenced of his I'm Free-solos. But let me show you what I mean, Mike. Here's a bunch of I'm Free Taylor-solos. The last one is from Ya Yas (and, yes, I found a part there, too )







Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-01-07 11:11 by DandelionPowderman.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Dreamer

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Title5Take1

Quote
Doxa

Another, more recent Taylor quote from 2011 (timeisonourside.com again):

I added my solo to Sway, but it's very much Mick's song. I don't think Keith's on it. It had a great, loose feel. Mick played rhythm guitar on that. He's a great rhythm player. My theory is he has a natural feel and that's also why he's such a great dancer.

- Doxa

I totally agree with MT above, but here's Keith in GUITAR WORLD:

GUITAR WORLD: "How do you rate Mick Jagger as a guitar player?"

KEITH: "On acoustic, he's a damned good rhythm player. I'd never let him play electric if I could help it... ... No sense of electric at all..."

GW: "SWAY is Mick on electric."

KEITH: "Yeah... Well, like I say, acoustically he's got a nice touch. It doesn't translate electrically. It's not his thing. It's not everybody's cup of tea."

I think Keith is referring to Mick's choice of sound, which generally is a bit iffy, imo. Sway, Some Girls and Stop Breakin' Down are exceptions, though.

Always liked this interview: good journalist. And this part is brilliant: the fearless pirate is caught loaded with fear & jealousy and talking bs.

How? Sounds like a quick rebound to me.

To me Keith is pushed into a corner a bit, and if pushed a bit more, he would have contradicted himself. For him, unlike for DandiePowderman, "Sway" it is not an exception, but, actually, as he says, an example of what he just claimed, that is, how lousy Jagger is ("no sense of electric at all"). This begs the question that why on earth Keith let that piece of crap to released in the first place? If he thought that was such terrible, why didn't he do something about it? Wasn't this the guy who supposedly spent nights and nights in the studio to make sure that the feel and sound in a particulal track is just right? Either Keith wasn't any longer interested or he didn't have a say. I think neither is something he would admit (Keith not interested how the main guitar sounds like in a Rolling Stones recording, or didn't have any longer power to vote against). Instead I suggest that he - like anybody - back then saw it being perfectly alright, and is lying now to be 'consistent'...

Anyway, my guess is that Keith speaks in a very general level there, and if there is any particular reference he has in his mind (Jagger's electric guitar playing as a some sort of problem), that is SOME GIRLS era and the 'three guitar attack' back then. From that period I recall Keith saying something to the effect that Jagger needed to be turned down, because he was messing too much, or something. Somehow I see the point how an over-eager, punk-influenced amateur, with probably no any any sense for nuances (but for volume), might have gone to old pro's nerves back then... Before that when Jagger rarely played electric guitar in a Stones track, it was usually - or maybe even always - when Keith was not around; namely, especially in 1970 Richards acquired the habit of missing sessions. From Stargroves we have backing tracks done for such Jagger/Taylor guitar collaborations as "Sway" and "Stop Breaking Down". "Moonlight Mile" belongs to list, even though Jagger 'only' plays acoustic.

So the way I see Keith's "Sway" comment is that the baby is thrown out with birth-water; a wonderful opportunity to bash Jagger - the very need to share this surprising 'revelation' of Jagger's skills (man's who foremost is not very well-known as any sort of guitarist) - is not wasted, and goes beyond anything else.

- Doxa

You don't even really know what Keith means. Isn't it a bit shortage of real info on this to conclude as strongly as you do?

For all we know, Keith could have been sick and tired of Mick's loud strumming in the studio AND his sound + numerous discussions about where to play and not to play.

And let's add to the mix that from 1989 on, Keith have repeatedly complimented Micks electric guitar playing.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Eleanor Rigby

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Doxa

Quote
PhillyFAN

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Santana did some of that stuff the year before, Mike. I'm sure there were others as well - mixing in some latin and jazz in their rock solos, like Taylor did here.

Good stuff, but nothing groundbreaking or earth-shattering about it, imo. But indeed a taste of what to come on SF and IORR.

Amen to that. Santana was already blazing those trails and introduced Latino flavor to Rock n Roll. I think it was somewhat different and refreshing hearing it from an English rock and blues band - the Stones.

Damn it looks it is tough for you guys to give Taylor some credit...

- Doxa

I thought "good stuff" was a positive remark?

positive when it comes from Dandie...

MT's solo(s) makes the song...

Taylor didn't play on the original song we discussed above (I'm Free) - hence he's not making the song, although he added some good stuff to it live as I wrote.

Yep..and its that "good stuff" that makes the song..LIVE!
id hardly think the lyrics are amything to ride home about..
Its a piss break without MT's contribution.

Quote
Eleanor Rigby

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Eleanor Rigby

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Doxa

Quote
PhillyFAN

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Santana did some of that stuff the year before, Mike. I'm sure there were others as well - mixing in some latin and jazz in their rock solos, like Taylor did here.

Good stuff, but nothing groundbreaking or earth-shattering about it, imo. But indeed a taste of what to come on SF and IORR.

Amen to that. Santana was already blazing those trails and introduced Latino flavor to Rock n Roll. I think it was somewhat different and refreshing hearing it from an English rock and blues band - the Stones.

Damn it looks it is tough for you guys to give Taylor some credit...

- Doxa

I thought "good stuff" was a positive remark?

positive when it comes from Dandie...

MT's solo(s) makes the song...

Taylor didn't play on the original song we discussed above (I'm Free) - hence he's not making the song, although he added some good stuff to it live as I wrote.

Yep..and its that "good stuff" that makes the song..LIVE!
id hardly think the lyrics are amything to ride home about..
Its a piss break without MT's contribution.

Love the original studio version, love the 69 versions, love the Stripped version and love the SAL-version.

We have a different approach to music, seemingly. Is the rest of Out Of Our Heads a "piss break" too, iyo?

Of course not...in fact one of my fav albums.
But the MT contribution to Im Free on the US 1969 tour took a catchy song on Out of Our Heads to a new level..simple as that.

Quote
Eleanor Rigby
Of course not...in fact one of my fav albums.
But the MT contribution to Im Free on the US 1969 tour took a catchy song on Out of Our Heads to a new level..simple as that.

Catchy song or piss break-song? Make up your mind

That was my entire point...

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Eleanor Rigby
Of course not...in fact one of my fav albums.
But the MT contribution to Im Free on the US 1969 tour took a catchy song on Out of Our Heads to a new level..simple as that.

Catchy song or piss break-song? Make up your mind

That was my entire point...

Ha..well a piss break song if played live without MT

That's not to say its a bad song..but hardly inspiring if played live the same way as the original.

Perhaps we should get back to talking about Sway..which is a great song.
Jagger's vocal is one of his finest..

Quote
Eleanor Rigby

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Eleanor Rigby
Of course not...in fact one of my fav albums.
But the MT contribution to Im Free on the US 1969 tour took a catchy song on Out of Our Heads to a new level..simple as that.

Catchy song or piss break-song? Make up your mind

That was my entire point...

Ha..well a piss break song if played live without MT

That's not to say its a bad song..but hardly inspiring if played live the same way as the original.

Perhaps we should get back to talking about Sway..which is a great song.
Jagger's vocal is one of his finest..

Very good vocals indeed. Keith's as well

One of my TOP favorite track!!!!!!!

Mine too:

I have tried many times to cover Sway, always ending up with awful results.

It's frustrating, because the song in itself is quite simple.

What is difficult is to get across the emotions of the original studio cut. And when this doesn't happen, the performance just falls flat.

As always with Stones songs, it's extremely difficult to say exactly what "makes" the song. It's just a sum of thousands little nuances. Of course Jagger's vocals and Taylor's solos stand out, but there are so many layers of greatness under and above those vocals and guitar lines!

C

The "I'm Free" solo I talked about is here at the 4:50 mark. I think it is new ground for the band in terms of musical beauty, touch, tone, elegance, sophistication...whatever. I suggest it inspired Jagger and led to ML Mile, Winter, TWFNO and that was a new direction musical and lyrically.

[www.youtube.com]