Last night I watched Muscle Shoals on Netflix, and it was very entertaining. It was founded by Rick Hall, who is still recording past the age of eighty. Rick worked the controls and did the producing, and was ably assisted by four little known local musicians, Johnson, Hood, Hawkins, and Beckett. With little music or business experience, this little hole in the wall suddenly clicked and produced some of the most important rock music in the world. Rick took on Aretha Franklin, who had been released from a major contract, and produced Respect and many other hits. Other great acts recorded there, and at the competing studio founded by his four session men. Other great acts followed for both businesses: Allman Brothers, Bob Dylan, the Rolling Stones, and many others.

Mick and Keith and other artists were asked why they enjoyed recording there. Some described a magical or mystical quality to the picturesque location, while others may have attributed it to the atmosphere inside the studio, or the producing skills of Hall, or the unique acoustics of the small studio, or the chemistry of the four young musicians.

Does anyone know why the Stones preferred this studio, when it was probably more convenient for them to have recorded in London or New York City, both of which probably possessed much better technology?

Didn't Keith & Mick answer that question when asked in the film?

this link is a bit of background:

[www.bmi.com]

but if I read it correctly, Muscle Shoals is Jimmy Johnson, Roger Hawkins, Barry Beckett, and David Hood's studio, not Rick Hall's. He owned Fame Studios and they split off to form Muscle Shoals..

“'The Stones came in, and they were a little rusty at first because they hadn’t been practicing on account of the tour,' says Johnson."
Rather at odds with Keith's longstanding observation that there's no better time to record than immediately after a tour.
Far be it from me to question Jimmy Johnson, but what the hell?! Of course they'd been "practicing", it wasn't an ice-skating tour!

Unless I'm reading way too fast (it's that time of the afternoon) one thing that page doesn't mention
is that the Stones had touring visas, which meant it was illegal for them to be recording studio tracks.
So one attraction of Muscle Shoals Sounds, in addition to the sound and the vibe,
must have been its relative obscurity.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-09-02 17:50 by with sssoul.

yeah I thought the same, about Johnson's comment on them being rusty..

then I remembered reading Stanley Booth's account of those sessions..

I don't think they were rusty, it was just the Stones being the Stones..

Quote
with sssoul
“'The Stones came in, and they were a little rusty at first because they hadn’t been practicing on account of the tour,' says Johnson."
Rather at odds with Keith's longstanding observation that there's no better time to record than immediately after a tour.
Far be it from me to question Jimmy Johnson, but what the hell?! Of course they'd been "practicing", it wasn't an ice-skating tour!

They didn't play BS that many times, no WH + the YGM-arrangement was different on the tour.

New things to rehearse and to plan before recording, I guess

Quote
duke richardson
I don't think they were rusty, it was just the Stones being the Stones..

Exactly :E

The movie attributes the vibe around MS to the old Cherokee legend of music in the river.

Right, Dande dear, but working everything out in the studio instead of beforehand is the Stones being the Stones.
It surprised people.

The part on that page about the Mick not liking the sound on WH is interesting - I don't recall reading that before.
And it made me wonder ... I know the Stones appreciate the vibe, the sound, the traditions that the place stands for,
the personnel and all that, but maybe it isn't actually the case that they liked working there so much.
They've never done any more sessions there, although they could have.
And in fact if Stanley Booth is all the way correct, the studio was never paid for those 1969 sessions.

Quote
duke richardson
this link is a bit of background:

[www.bmi.com]

but if I read it correctly, Muscle Shoals is Jimmy Johnson, Roger Hawkins, Barry Beckett, and David Hood's studio, not Rick Hall's. He owned Fame Studios and they split off to form Muscle Shoals..

Correct.

Muscle Shoals had been a hotbed of great music since the early ‘60s when FAME studios, started by producer Rick Hall, churned out songs by Arthur Alexander, Wilson Pickett and Percy Sledge. In 1969, four of FAME’s session musicians – keyboardist Barry Beckett, bassist David Hood, drummer Roger Hawkins and guitarist Jimmy Johnson – left to open Muscle Shoals Sound.

Read More: 45 Years Ago: The Rolling Stones Cut Three Classic Tracks at Muscle Shoals | [ultimateclassicrock.com]

From what is available it was their lack of working visas for recording (I've never heard of such a thing - are they that specific?) at Muscle Shoals that made it attractive. The history of it probably helped but they were able to slide in and out unnoticed.

It's probably why they didn't pay. Certainly at some point someone sent them some money.

4. Sticky Fingers was written and recorded over a two-year span in three distinct locations: Muscle Shoals Studios in Alabama; Stargroves (Mick Jagger’s home and country estate during the 1970s) in East Woodhay, Hampshire, England; and Olympic Sound Studios in London. The recording at Muscle Shoals was largely clandestine as the band members did not have the proper visas to be recording in the United States.

[rockhall.com]

Quote
with sssoul
Right, Dande dear, but working everything out in the studio instead of beforehand is the Stones being the Stones.
It surprised people.

The part on that page about the Mick not liking the sound on WH is interesting - I don't recall reading that before.
And it made me wonder ... I know the Stones appreciate the vibe, the sound, the traditions that the place stands for,
the personnel and all that, but maybe it isn't actually the case that they liked working there so much.
They've never done any more sessions there, although they could have.
And in fact if Stanley Booth is all the way correct, the studio was never paid for those 1969 sessions.

well, after they got kicked out of England, France was closer..

Yes, but they could have gone back to Muscle Shoals in '75 if they'd wanted to, and they didn't.

FAME studio is where Jason Isbell recorded his first two albums at that studio (studio .

Quote
with sssoul
Yes, but they could have gone back to Muscle Shoals in '75 if they'd wanted to, and they didn't.

true.. its interesting, and it would have been cool if they had at some point gone back to that studio..

I mean it had that vibe and they knew it. maybe it was too ramshackle ..

Jagger didn't like their monitors, but surely they'd had them fixed..

Good enough for Isbell and Seger, then good enough for me!

Quote
flilflam
Does anyone know why the Stones preferred this studio, when it was probably more convenient for them to have recorded in London or New York City, both of which probably possessed much better technology?

They probably loved the sound of the Artists who had cut tracks there. It was gaining some what of a reputation for that distinctness. I think that combined with the fact they were in the South (had done a Florida concert a couple days earlier) and Stanley Booth recommending the place as a discrete but great sounding studio sealed the deal. There is no denying the Stones infatuation with the Southern USA music tradition/scene at that time. What better way to immerse themselves in it than a session in an Alabama studio where Aretha had cut Respect?

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
flilflam
Does anyone know why the Stones preferred this studio, when it was probably more convenient for them to have recorded in London or New York City, both of which probably possessed much better technology?

They probably loved the sound of the Artists who had cut tracks there. It was gaining some what of a reputation for that distinctness. I think that combined with the fact they were in the South (had done a Florida concert a couple days earlier) and Stanley Booth recommending the place as a discrete but great sounding studio sealed the deal. There is no denying the Stones infatuation with the Southern USA music tradition/scene at that time. What better way to immerse themselves in it than a session in an Alabama studio where Aretha had cut Respect?

Right on.
Their love and romanticizing of the music and culture of the south was a big part of it. And while they loved the sound of Aretha, Pickett etc...
Those records were made with the MS session musicians, and maybe the Stones didn't have the right dynamics or sensibilities. It was a home-grown studio that had its charm in the local guys that made it what it was.

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
flilflam
Does anyone know why the Stones preferred this studio, when it was probably more convenient for them to have recorded in London or New York City, both of which probably possessed much better technology?

They probably loved the sound of the Artists who had cut tracks there. It was gaining some what of a reputation for that distinctness. I think that combined with the fact they were in the South (had done a Florida concert a couple days earlier) and Stanley Booth recommending the place as a discrete but great sounding studio sealed the deal. There is no denying the Stones infatuation with the Southern USA music tradition/scene at that time. What better way to immerse themselves in it than a session in an Alabama studio where Aretha had cut Respect?

I read the 'Muscle Shoals sound' was due to the thick wood floor in what was a casket warehouse...Muscle Shoals is across the street from a cemetery...and that the floor resonated and added to the music. Not unlike Keith talking about the room being part of the sound in recorded rock & roll. It has been written many times that at the end of the 1969 Tour Keith told Stanley Booth the Stones were hot and needed to get into a studio, but that their visas allowed playing live but not recording. Booth called his pal Jim Dickinson, who was one of the Swampers...Muscles Shoals's rhythm section, and I believe, the studio's owners. Dickinson talked to Jimmy Johnson, another Swamper / owner, and told Booth to tell the Stones to arrive at night, under the radar. They did and the rest is history. In an interview Dickson talks about sitting on the front step in the middle of the night as the Stones warmed up inside. He said the whole place was vibrating, and that to this day he's never experienced anything quite like it. Like the summer 1971 Exile sessions at Nellcote, the 3 nights in December 1969 the Stones recorded at Muscle Shoals were the result of the place and the time. Trying to replicate them at a later date wouldn't have worked.

Quote
1969Fan

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
flilflam
Does anyone know why the Stones preferred this studio, when it was probably more convenient for them to have recorded in London or New York City, both of which probably possessed much better technology?

They probably loved the sound of the Artists who had cut tracks there. It was gaining some what of a reputation for that distinctness. I think that combined with the fact they were in the South (had done a Florida concert a couple days earlier) and Stanley Booth recommending the place as a discrete but great sounding studio sealed the deal. There is no denying the Stones infatuation with the Southern USA music tradition/scene at that time. What better way to immerse themselves in it than a session in an Alabama studio where Aretha had cut Respect?

I read the 'Muscle Shoals sound' was due to the thick wood floor in what was a casket warehouse...Muscle Shoals is across the street from a cemetery...and that the floor resonated and added to the music. Not unlike Keith talking about the room being part of the sound in recorded rock & roll. It has been written many times that at the end of the 1969 Tour Keith told Stanley Booth the Stones were hot and needed to get into a studio, but that their visas allowed playing live but not recording. Booth called his pal Jim Dickinson, who was one of the Swampers...Muscles Shoals's rhythm section, and I believe, the studio's owners. Dickinson talked to Jimmy Johnson, another Swamper / owner, and told Booth to tell the Stones to arrive at night, under the radar. They did and the rest is history. In an interview Dickson talks about sitting on the front step in the middle of the night as the Stones warmed up inside. He said the whole place was vibrating, and that to this day he's never experienced anything quite like it. Like the summer 1971 Exile sessions at Nellcote, the 3 nights in December 1969 the Stones recorded at Muscle Shoals were the result of the place and the time. Trying to replicate them at a later date wouldn't have worked.

Never heard that about the floor but I don't doubt it. Room acoustics are often considered sacred by sound engineers and I've worked on movie scores in rooms in the Sony Studios in Culver City, CA where no one has touched the scraps of cloth on the walls for 50 years because of the great film scores that were done there long ago! I think things like microphone bleed, microphone selection and placement and recording equipment (like the UA console at MS) probably had a bigger effect on the overall sound. But one thing is clear, those sessions with the Stones produced some great recordings!

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
1969Fan

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
flilflam
Does anyone know why the Stones preferred this studio, when it was probably more convenient for them to have recorded in London or New York City, both of which probably possessed much better technology?

They probably loved the sound of the Artists who had cut tracks there. It was gaining some what of a reputation for that distinctness. I think that combined with the fact they were in the South (had done a Florida concert a couple days earlier) and Stanley Booth recommending the place as a discrete but great sounding studio sealed the deal. There is no denying the Stones infatuation with the Southern USA music tradition/scene at that time. What better way to immerse themselves in it than a session in an Alabama studio where Aretha had cut Respect?

I read the 'Muscle Shoals sound' was due to the thick wood floor in what was a casket warehouse...Muscle Shoals is across the street from a cemetery...and that the floor resonated and added to the music. Not unlike Keith talking about the room being part of the sound in recorded rock & roll. It has been written many times that at the end of the 1969 Tour Keith told Stanley Booth the Stones were hot and needed to get into a studio, but that their visas allowed playing live but not recording. Booth called his pal Jim Dickinson, who was one of the Swampers...Muscles Shoals's rhythm section, and I believe, the studio's owners. Dickinson talked to Jimmy Johnson, another Swamper / owner, and told Booth to tell the Stones to arrive at night, under the radar. They did and the rest is history. In an interview Dickson talks about sitting on the front step in the middle of the night as the Stones warmed up inside. He said the whole place was vibrating, and that to this day he's never experienced anything quite like it. Like the summer 1971 Exile sessions at Nellcote, the 3 nights in December 1969 the Stones recorded at Muscle Shoals were the result of the place and the time. Trying to replicate them at a later date wouldn't have worked.

Never heard that about the floor but I don't doubt it. Room acoustics are often considered sacred by sound engineers and I've worked on movie scores in rooms in the Sony Studios in Culver City, CA where no one has touched the scraps of cloth on the walls for 50 years because of the great film scores that were done there long ago! I think things like microphone bleed, microphone selection and placement and recording equipment (like the UA console at MS) probably had a bigger effect on the overall sound. But one thing is clear, those sessions with the Stones produced some great recordings!

The same goes for Room 3 at what used to be United Western Recorders in LA...where the Beach Boys recorded Pet Sounds. That smaller room had a sweet sound that Brian Wilson really liked. You're right about consoles and microphones. Room 3 also had a Universal Audio console. When Your Place or Mine Recording remixed Pet Sounds to 5.1 surround in 2002, Mark Linett used a (probably very expensive) custom built replica of the vacuum tube UA console that was in place at Western in 1965-1966. It has been written that Charlie wanted to buy the microphones Jimmy Johnson used on his drums at Muscle Shoals. They weren't for sale. Like The Beach Boys and Pet Sounds at UW and the Stones at Muscle Shoals, there are a few sessions back when things were simpler, that were, and still are, magic. Pure magic. No other explanation needed.

While Bill Putnam, the owner of United Western, was out of the country, an young engineer named Allen Sides bought the Room 3 UA console and a bunch of vacuum tube condenser mics that were in the back room at UW. He paid for them with a rubber check, but by the end of the day, he had sold enough of the equipment to cover it. At that time solid state was all the rage and it replaced the older vacuum tube tuff. Allen used that gear to start Ocean Way Recording, now one of the world's premier recording studios. BTW...the name Ocean Way came from a leased garage behind a house on Ocean Way in Santa Monica where Allen did his first for-money sessions. I was one of his earlier paying clients. And I think he's still using the mics he 'bought' from UW w/o Putnam's knowledge.

There's a flourishing business driving tourists around to see stars' homes here in tinsel town. I'd like to see tours of legendary recording studios...United Western, A&M, Elektra, Sunset Recorders, Sound City, RCA, Capitol, etc. There's a lot of music history stashed away in plain sight in LA if you know what you're looking for.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-09-04 22:05 by 1969Fan.

Excellent post 1969 Fan! I've been to Ocean Way many times but never knew that history of Allen Sides. Wow. Try finding some of those old Neumann mics these days for decent prices. I used to shop the garage sales and pawn shops in the area searching for vintage gear and was occasionally successful but with the internet these things have dried up, at least at bargain prices.

As you probably know Universal Audio is still alive and well down in Santa Cruz California and I think they are still making some of those compressors and mic pre's based on the original designs. A great company last time I was there.

You are right about a lot of recording history in LA! Hidden behind unmarked doors on streets in North Hollywood and Burbank are some of the most historic and valuable studio treasures imaginable. As you know most of the gear has been separated from the original studios, piecemealed out and is hard to maintain and keep running but I am always amazed when I see some of that old stuff still in action. With Protools and digital workstations it takes true commitment to preserve and protect the old recording legacies. Cheers brother.

What to make of the fact that the Stones recorded at the new location (pictured above) which had only been in open for less than a year, since March 1969.

The studio that was already famous (see below) was down the road apiece at 603 East Avalon Avenue