Quote
Turner68
Get a lucky dip ticket. It's worth it.

Yeah, but unless you'd like to cover my airfare, hotel cost, and give me a ride to the stadium, I'm still stuck here at home. I think I'll wait it out and just play my albums.

Quote
Naturalust
I also generally prefer the studio versions of their best tunes to the live stuff. It's not hard to understand why considering how much time and effort they dedicated to each song. They worked till they were perfect, something they obviously can't do live.

peace

Once I heard someone say: perfection is boring. And indeed, there's much truth in that. Think about it.

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
Naturalust
I also generally prefer the studio versions of their best tunes to the live stuff. It's not hard to understand why considering how much time and effort they dedicated to each song. They worked till they were perfect, something they obviously can't do live.

peace

Once I heard someone say: perfection is boring. And indeed, there's much truth in that. Think about it.

Kleerie, where does that leave you and me? HAH!

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
Naturalust
I also generally prefer the studio versions of their best tunes to the live stuff. It's not hard to understand why considering how much time and effort they dedicated to each song. They worked till they were perfect, something they obviously can't do live.

peace

Once I heard someone say: perfection is boring. And indeed, there's much truth in that. Think about it.

Kleerie, where does that leave you and me? HAH!

Latebloomer!

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
Naturalust
I also generally prefer the studio versions of their best tunes to the live stuff. It's not hard to understand why considering how much time and effort they dedicated to each song. They worked till they were perfect, something they obviously can't do live.

peace

Once I heard someone say: perfection is boring. And indeed, there's much truth in that. Think about it.

i think this might be the first time ever the stones have been accused of being so perfect that it's boring

Quote
Turner68

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
Naturalust
I also generally prefer the studio versions of their best tunes to the live stuff. It's not hard to understand why considering how much time and effort they dedicated to each song. They worked till they were perfect, something they obviously can't do live.

peace

Once I heard someone say: perfection is boring. And indeed, there's much truth in that. Think about it.

i think this might be the first time ever the stones have been accused of being so perfect that it's boring

You're mixing up Naturalust's post and mine. I don't agree that the studio work of the Stones is perfect. That said I prefer great live perfomances, because they're not artificial (let's not stumble across overdubs), but right in your face.

Sometimes there's something in between, kleer.
This studio outtake has the punch of a live version.

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
Turner68

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
Naturalust
I also generally prefer the studio versions of their best tunes to the live stuff. It's not hard to understand why considering how much time and effort they dedicated to each song. They worked till they were perfect, something they obviously can't do live.

peace

Once I heard someone say: perfection is boring. And indeed, there's much truth in that. Think about it.

i think this might be the first time ever the stones have been accused of being so perfect that it's boring

You're mixing up Naturalust's post and mine. I don't agree that the studio work of the Stones is perfect. That said I prefer great live perfomances, because they're not artificial (let's not stumble across overdubs), but right in your face.

I indeed said the Stones best studio work is perfect. I certainly never brought boring into the discussion. The studio is a tool for creating songscapes and recordings that can seldom be reproduced live. The Stones, especially in the Jimmy Miller era, were complete masters of it. I could never find those recordings boring. To me they are the best reflections of what the band it trying to convey in a song because they take the time and effort to make them "perfect" before they release them.

To characterize it as artificial is somewhat of an oversimplification, imo. It is never meant to be a representation of a live performance, just a sincere effort to make a recording of a song sound as good as possible. Overdubs and layered vocal treatment are often what make these recording so damn good! I would never want the Stones to limit themselves by not using every tool and trick in the studio at their disposal to convey the song the way they want. It is their art and the studio just an important tool of the trade.

Playing live is something different altogether, it's exciting to hear bands try to reproduce the songs they created in the studio and I appreciate the variations, additions and compromises they make in doing so. The songs often become something else altogether. The ones who are capable of making them better live are truly exciting and the Stones have certainly done than on occasion, just not for a long time, imo.

Contrarily, I get no distinct thrill from seeing bands like The Eagles reproduce their songs with studio perfection during their live performances. That is indeed boring, might as well just play the record. The best of both world's is conveyed by bands like the Stones who have "perfect" studio recordings and different and exciting "in your face" live shows.

For me the hierarchy of enjoyment of stones songs, in general, is 1) Watching and hearing live performances in person 2) Listening to studio recordings 3) Listening to live recordings and bootlegs.

Although I must admit that there are some live recordings which I enjoy more than the studio cuts. Probably no surprise that these are almost exclusively from the Taylor era and largely due to his amazing live guitar work.

peace



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-06-13 21:12 by Naturalust.

Quote
LuxuryStones
Sometimes there's something in between, kleer.
This studio outtake has the punch of a live version.

Weird... I remember hating the album version, but I actually kinda liked this one. Maybe I could possibly warm up to live Stones??? Who knows, anything's possible...

Also... where was that picture at 0:19 from?

Quote
HearMeKnockin
Also... where was that picture at 0:19 from?

It's from the studio in Jamacia when they were recording GHS.

peace

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
HearMeKnockin
Also... where was that picture at 0:19 from?

It's from the studio in Jamacia when they were recording GHS.

peace

Thanks, Naturalust.

Quote
LuxuryStones
This studio outtake has the punch of a live version.

And is better because of that IMO. MT's guitar has a vibrancy in that outtake that mastering removed, obviously with the Glimmer Twins approval. Jimmy Miller was great, but he mostly mangled Mick Taylor. I have zero idea of why Taylor really left the Stones but the latter couldn't have been pleased by what he'd heard. I find TWFNO tedious not for what Taylor plays but for the shit way his guitar was eq'd and mastered.

Mick & Keith did themselves no favor by never adequately replacing Miller, again IMO. Even though the latter was present for GHS it's been all downhill, starting with that record. From the sonically drab ( ST, DLS and Luxury- yikes, especially Luxury) to the hyper-pristine (HOF, AHYS), the thin (most of the ER album) to plain amateur-ish (Undercover)... culminating with the operating room level sanitization of the Don Was albums.

Quote
TonyMo

Quote
LuxuryStones
This studio outtake has the punch of a live version.

And is better because of that IMO. MT's guitar has a vibrancy in that outtake that mastering removed, obviously with the Glimmer Twins approval. Jimmy Miller was great, but he mostly mangled Mick Taylor. I have zero idea of why Taylor really left the Stones but the latter couldn't have been pleased by what he'd heard. I find TWFNO tedious not for what Taylor plays but for the shit way his guitar was eq'd and mastered.

Mick & Keith did themselves no favor by never adequately replacing Miller, again IMO. Even though the latter was present for GHS it's been all downhill, starting with that record. From the sonically drab ( ST, DLS and Luxury- yikes, especially Luxury) to the hyper-pristine (HOF, AHYS), the thin (most of the ER album) to plain amateur-ish (Undercover)... culminating with the operating room level sanitization of the Don Was albums.

I agree. However the songwriting was also below par. Not sure any producer could have made some of those albums great.

Quote
Turner68

Quote
TonyMo

Quote
LuxuryStones
This studio outtake has the punch of a live version.

And is better because of that IMO. MT's guitar has a vibrancy in that outtake that mastering removed, obviously with the Glimmer Twins approval. Jimmy Miller was great, but he mostly mangled Mick Taylor. I have zero idea of why Taylor really left the Stones but the latter couldn't have been pleased by what he'd heard. I find TWFNO tedious not for what Taylor plays but for the shit way his guitar was eq'd and mastered.

Mick & Keith did themselves no favor by never adequately replacing Miller, again IMO. Even though the latter was present for GHS it's been all downhill, starting with that record. From the sonically drab ( ST, DLS and Luxury- yikes, especially Luxury) to the hyper-pristine (HOF, AHYS), the thin (most of the ER album) to plain amateur-ish (Undercover)... culminating with the operating room level sanitization of the Don Was albums.

I agree. However the songwriting was also below par. Not sure any producer could have made some of those albums great.

All the producers, including Jimmy Miller have stated that the Mick and Keith basically produce themselves. It's amazingly hard to tell what each one brought to the table. I tend to think the combination of great songs and instrumentation and Millers keen sense of the groove was the magic formula during that period. He probably just picked the right takes and stood around shaking a percussion instrument and pushing the guys to do their best.

It's also hard to blame Miller for Taylor's sonic treatment. I get the feeling Mick and Keith were more responsible for that than he was. Andy John's was obviously a huge Taylor fan and friend and often at the controls on the mixing board, I've never heard him tall about anything but trying to please Mick and Keith with the final mixes.

peace

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
Turner68

Quote
TonyMo

Quote
LuxuryStones
This studio outtake has the punch of a live version.

And is better because of that IMO. MT's guitar has a vibrancy in that outtake that mastering removed, obviously with the Glimmer Twins approval. Jimmy Miller was great, but he mostly mangled Mick Taylor. I have zero idea of why Taylor really left the Stones but the latter couldn't have been pleased by what he'd heard. I find TWFNO tedious not for what Taylor plays but for the shit way his guitar was eq'd and mastered.

Mick & Keith did themselves no favor by never adequately replacing Miller, again IMO. Even though the latter was present for GHS it's been all downhill, starting with that record. From the sonically drab ( ST, DLS and Luxury- yikes, especially Luxury) to the hyper-pristine (HOF, AHYS), the thin (most of the ER album) to plain amateur-ish (Undercover)... culminating with the operating room level sanitization of the Don Was albums.

I agree. However the songwriting was also below par. Not sure any producer could have made some of those albums great.

All the producers, including Jimmy Miller have stated that the Mick and Keith basically produce themselves. It's amazingly hard to tell what each one brought to the table. I tend to think the combination of great songs and instrumentation and Millers keen sense of the groove was the magic formula during that period. He probably just picked the right takes and stood around shaking a percussion instrument and pushing the guys to do their best.

It's also hard to blame Miller for Taylor's sonic treatment. I get the feeling Mick and Keith were more responsible for that than he was. Andy John's was obviously a huge Taylor fan and friend and often at the controls on the mixing board, I've never heard him tall about anything but trying to please Mick and Keith with the final mixes.

peace

Well, I don't think it's a coincidence that they did their best work with Jimmy producing... he must've been doing something right. With regard to Taylor, I think that it was Keith's jealously that got him mixed down and deprived him of songwriting credits. Keith didn't like the closeness of the Mick & Mick relationship and wanted Taylor out - of the credits, band, and songs. For example, on Dancing with Mr. D, Taylor plays a solid lead that is much quieter than Keith's riff. Coincidence? I think not.

Quote
HearMeKnockin
Well, I don't think it's a coincidence that they did their best work with Jimmy producing... he must've been doing something right. With regard to Taylor, I think that it was Keith's jealously that got him mixed down and deprived him of songwriting credits. Keith didn't like the closeness of the Mick & Mick relationship and wanted Taylor out - of the credits, band, and songs. For example, on Dancing with Mr. D, Taylor plays a solid lead that is much quieter than Keith's riff. Coincidence? I think not.

Not so sure jealousy was quite the reason but I can speak from experience that when musicians are mixing their music they all have a tendency to mix their own parts a little louder. I imagine it was Keith and Mick in the control room most of the time and Mick and Keith the ones whom the mix engineers were trying to please in the end. As the songwriters it was probably the right thing overall. It really has been the Mick and Keith show since 1967 or so.

But don't get me wrong, I have noting but admiration and respect for Jimmy Miller's role in the whole affair. He was obviously the perfect man for the job at that time and I'm very grateful for the results. I often wish Mick and Keith would talk more about his role and contributions instead of the "we wore him out" crap we get from Keith.

peace

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
Turner68

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
Naturalust
I also generally prefer the studio versions of their best tunes to the live stuff. It's not hard to understand why considering how much time and effort they dedicated to each song. They worked till they were perfect, something they obviously can't do live.

peace

Once I heard someone say: perfection is boring. And indeed, there's much truth in that. Think about it.

i think this might be the first time ever the stones have been accused of being so perfect that it's boring

You're mixing up Naturalust's post and mine. I don't agree that the studio work of the Stones is perfect. That said I prefer great live perfomances, because they're not artificial (let's not stumble across overdubs), but right in your face.

I indeed said the Stones best studio work is perfect. I certainly never brought boring into the discussion. The studio is a tool for creating songscapes and recordings that can seldom be reproduced live. The Stones, especially in the Jimmy Miller era, were complete masters of it. I could never find those recordings boring. To me they are the best reflections of what the band it trying to convey in a song because they take the time and effort to make them "perfect" before they release them.

To characterize it as artificial is somewhat of an oversimplification, imo. It is never meant to be a representation of a live performance, just a sincere effort to make a recording of a song sound as good as possible. Overdubs and layered vocal treatment are often what make these recording so damn good! I would never want the Stones to limit themselves by not using every tool and trick in the studio at their disposal to convey the song the way they want. It is their art and the studio just an important tool of the trade.

Playing live is something different altogether, it's exciting to hear bands try to reproduce the songs they created in the studio and I appreciate the variations, additions and compromises they make in doing so. The songs often become something else altogether. The ones who are capable of making them better live are truly exciting and the Stones have certainly done than on occasion, just not for a long time, imo.

Contrarily, I get no distinct thrill from seeing bands like The Eagles reproduce their songs with studio perfection during their live performances. That is indeed boring, might as well just play the record. The best of both world's is conveyed by bands like the Stones who have "perfect" studio recordings and different and exciting "in your face" live shows.

For me the hierarchy of enjoyment of stones songs, in general, is 1) Watching and hearing live performances in person 2) Listening to studio recordings 3) Listening to live recordings and bootlegs.

Although I must admit that there are some live recordings which I enjoy more than the studio cuts. Probably no surprise that these are almost exclusively from the Taylor era and largely due to his amazing live guitar work.

peace

Agree w/ most of this. The Stones are, in my opinion, usually underrated as studio wizards and overrated as live performers. (Other than SFTD in 69 and MR in 69-73, I'm not sure there's a single Stones song I prefer live over studio.)

In spite of their gritty blues garage band roots, Jagger and Richard became MASTERS of the studio pretty quickly. Their best records are shot through with "effects" that simply cannot be adequately reproduced in a live setting. I'm thinking of things like the acoustic guitar sound on SFM or the intro to SMU or Nicky's piano on SCB (among dozens of other examples of course).

There is very definitely a sense of "perfection" about the way they constructed their classic recordings.

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
HearMeKnockin
Well, I don't think it's a coincidence that they did their best work with Jimmy producing... he must've been doing something right. With regard to Taylor, I think that it was Keith's jealously that got him mixed down and deprived him of songwriting credits. Keith didn't like the closeness of the Mick & Mick relationship and wanted Taylor out - of the credits, band, and songs. For example, on Dancing with Mr. D, Taylor plays a solid lead that is much quieter than Keith's riff. Coincidence? I think not.

Not so sure jealousy was quite the reason but I can speak from experience that when musicians are mixing their music they all have a tendency to mix their own parts a little louder. I imagine it was Keith and Mick in the control room most of the time and Mick and Keith the ones whom the mix engineers were trying to please in the end. As the songwriters it was probably the right thing overall. It really has been the Mick and Keith show since 1967 or so.

But don't get me wrong, I have noting but admiration and respect for Jimmy Miller's role in the whole affair. He was obviously the perfect man for the job at that time and I'm very grateful for the results. I often wish Mick and Keith would talk more about his role and contributions instead of the "we wore him out" crap we get from Keith.

peace

You're probably right on about the mixing thing... although I think Mick should've mixed his voice louder on If You Can't Rock Me...

Kidding aside, I'm guessing that we'll never get a straight answer about Jimmy Miller from the PR masters that are the Glimmer Twins, and if any rock stars have learned to say something without saying anything, it's them. They've probably been trying to forget about him for 40 years... another casualty of working with the Stones too long. He was certainly an excellent producer in bad conditions (like Keith's basement), but the Stones don't like giving people besides the Stones credit for anything...

And I will go to my grave saying Keith was jealous of MT's tightness with Jagger and didn't like having the spotlight taken off of him.

Quote
TonyMo

Quote
LuxuryStones
This studio outtake has the punch of a live version.

And is better because of that IMO. MT's guitar has a vibrancy in that outtake that mastering removed, obviously with the Glimmer Twins approval..

I agree, you can almost hear the new strings on his guitar. One of his finest moments in the studio with the Stones, a splendid combination of playing rhythm and noodling, it even reminds me of Hendrix a bit .And of course Keith and the rest of the band are punching like Tyson as well. Another masterpiece, this version. Should have been on iorr in the first place imo.

Quote
LongBeachArena72
Agree w/ most of this. The Stones are, in my opinion, usually underrated as studio wizards and overrated as live performers. (Other than SFTD in 69 and MR in 69-73, I'm not sure there's a single Stones song I prefer live over studio.)

In spite of their gritty blues garage band roots, Jagger and Richard became MASTERS of the studio pretty quickly. Their best records are shot through with "effects" that simply cannot be adequately reproduced in a live setting. I'm thinking of things like the acoustic guitar sound on SFM or the intro to SMU or Nicky's piano on SCB (among dozens of other examples of course).

There is very definitely a sense of "perfection" about the way they constructed their classic recordings.

Agree totally about their studio work! But I love their live playing as well, and how their live performances differed from their studio tracks in a really good way.

bump

The weird thing about the live set-up now is that you have a shadow band that is clinical playing the arrangements as close to the studio version as possible combined with guitarists who are flubbing bits (these are not ragged glories but rather embarrassing attempts) and these two sounds do not compliment each other and end up sounding at once too polished and not polished enough. Plus the emotional drive behind the mistakes is missing leaving only the mistakes standing there looking and sounding silly.

It still goes off despite this quite a bit but not nearly enough as it should, even at this late stage in the game.

Taylor's playing on MR and others last time out seemed to bridge these two solitudes and made the overall sound more coherent as a result.

Quote
andrewt
The weird thing about the live set-up now is that you have a shadow band that is clinical playing the arrangements as close to the studio version as possible combined with guitarists who are flubbing bits (these are not ragged glories but rather embarrassing attempts) and these two sounds do not compliment each other and end up sounding at once too polished and not polished enough. Plus the emotional drive behind the mistakes is missing leaving only the mistakes standing there looking and sounding silly.

It still goes off despite this quite a bit but not nearly enough as it should, even at this late stage in the game.

Taylor's playing on MR and others last time out seemed to bridge these two solitudes and made the overall sound more coherent as a result.

the shows have been inconsistent Orlando was a mess but the previous one was terrific.

MT (and/or his people) talking about the royalties issue again - [www.facebook.com] - from this it would appear that no settlement has been forthcoming as yet.

Fan: «This is the Stones as I know them!»

"Mick Taylor": «It's how I know them, too...»

Quote
Stoneburst
MT (and/or his people) talking about the royalties issue again - [www.facebook.com] - from this it would appear that no settlement has been forthcoming as yet.

Not sure what to think of this. If Taylor is not getting anything from this re-issue I would be pretty surprised. It takes time for royalties to be figured and distributed, usually quarterly. Hope he gets what's due to him.


peace

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
Stoneburst
MT (and/or his people) talking about the royalties issue again - [www.facebook.com] - from this it would appear that no settlement has been forthcoming as yet.

Not sure what to think of this. If Taylor is not getting anything from this re-issue I would be pretty surprised. It takes time for royalties to be figured and distributed, usually quarterly. Hope he gets what's due to him.


peace

It's even more surprising if he hasn't seen a penny since the 1971 release, like his people claim?

Mick Taylor has an official, verified Facebook page. [www.facebook.com]
The page you are referring to is not his official Facebook page.
Facebook puts a blue check mark next to pages that are verified as official.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-06-15 17:03 by Turner68.

Two things: 1) it appears he's speaking about royalties due to him in general, not just those from Sticky Fingers (the reissue or otherwise); 2) he clarifies that the royalties in question are from record sales, not songwriting credits. I don't think he's claimed that he gets literally no royalties of either sort: can't find it right now, but I think there was an interview with him floating around the internet from 2000 or thereabouts where he said that he got some, just not what he was owed. I assume that was a reference to Ventilator Blues.