For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
Turner68Quote
DandelionPowderman
People are obviously fans of the Stones for different reasons, and we have learned the last few weeks that Keith Richards's playing and singing not necessarily has anything to do with why others like the Stones. Quite on the contrary, a couple of years ago people were playing with the thought of replacing him!
For me that is baffling, but my reasons for loving the Stones are probably baffling to others as well
there is a lot of diversity. for me, the biggest surprise is the number of people who don't seem to be fans of the "classic stones" - i.e. the brian jones era. and also i'm surprised to learn that there are fans of their recent albums. part of what makes it fun to come here and chat about stuff. it would be boring if we all agreed.
Quote
MaindefenderQuote
Stoneburst
Not really, no. More to the point, the famous recording of Let It Rock from the Leeds show is (as far as we know) authentic - no overdubs or edits, unlike say Ya-Ya's. We have no idea how many takes Blues In The Morning is a product of, but I would bet it's quite a few.
According to Steve Jordan BITM was cut in 15 minutes, one take I believe. Hopefully somebody can find the quote from the many publications, I will also keep looking.
Quote
matxilQuote
MaindefenderQuote
Stoneburst
Not really, no. More to the point, the famous recording of Let It Rock from the Leeds show is (as far as we know) authentic - no overdubs or edits, unlike say Ya-Ya's. We have no idea how many takes Blues In The Morning is a product of, but I would bet it's quite a few.
According to Steve Jordan BITM was cut in 15 minutes, one take I believe. Hopefully somebody can find the quote from the many publications, I will also keep looking.
His guitar-assistent (or whatever it's called), Pierre Beaumont (I'm not sure about the name either) says so in the "Under the Influence" documentary. Apparantly, it was just a jam that started with him (Pierre) digging up a long non-used old classic guitar and Keith having a go with it. It surprised me a lot that it's just one take (although I guess at least the vocals must have been overdubbed later, right?).
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
matxilQuote
Maindefender
According to Steve Jordan BITM was cut in 15 minutes, one take I believe.
Hopefully somebody can find the quote from the many publications, I will also keep looking.
His guitar-assistent (or whatever it's called), Pierre Beaumont (I'm not sure about the name either)
says so in the "Under the Influence" documentary. Apparantly, it was just a jam that started with him (Pierre)
digging up a long non-used old classic guitar and Keith having a go with it. It surprised me a lot
that it's just one take (although I guess at least the vocals must have been overdubbed later, right?).
I think Pierre was referring to the backing track. They added solos, vocals and other stuff later, probably.
Quote
with sssoulQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
matxilQuote
Maindefender
According to Steve Jordan BITM was cut in 15 minutes, one take I believe.
Hopefully somebody can find the quote from the many publications, I will also keep looking.
His guitar-assistent (or whatever it's called), Pierre Beaumont (I'm not sure about the name either)
says so in the "Under the Influence" documentary. Apparantly, it was just a jam that started with him (Pierre)
digging up a long non-used old classic guitar and Keith having a go with it. It surprised me a lot
that it's just one take (although I guess at least the vocals must have been overdubbed later, right?).
I think Pierre was referring to the backing track. They added solos, vocals and other stuff later, probably.
On Blues in the Morning Keith is on guitar, bass, piano and vocals, so it wasn't one take.
Sorry to bellow, but when I said this on page one no one heard me. :E
It would be a bit strange (not unheard of) for the bass to be added afterwards,
but I guess that's what they did if Pierre (de Beauport is his name) is to be taken literally.
When I saw the credits on BitM I wondered if Pierre didn't mean some other track and just misspeak.
Quote
with sssoul
OK so everybody stands (or sits) corrected. In my circles it's considered a bit strange to add bass afterwards.
It's the base, after all!
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
matxilQuote
MaindefenderQuote
Stoneburst
Not really, no. More to the point, the famous recording of Let It Rock from the Leeds show is (as far as we know) authentic - no overdubs or edits, unlike say Ya-Ya's. We have no idea how many takes Blues In The Morning is a product of, but I would bet it's quite a few.
According to Steve Jordan BITM was cut in 15 minutes, one take I believe. Hopefully somebody can find the quote from the many publications, I will also keep looking.
His guitar-assistent (or whatever it's called), Pierre Beaumont (I'm not sure about the name either) says so in the "Under the Influence" documentary. Apparantly, it was just a jam that started with him (Pierre) digging up a long non-used old classic guitar and Keith having a go with it. It surprised me a lot that it's just one take (although I guess at least the vocals must have been overdubbed later, right?).
I think Pierre was referring to the backing track. They added solos, vocals and other stuff later, probably.
Quote
DandelionPowderman
He meant drums and guitars indeed. It's not that unusual to add bass later, actually.
Ask Duke Richardson (the IORR Band's bass player) about that, he he
Quote
with sssoulQuote
Maindefender
According to Steve Jordan BITM was cut in 15 minutes, one take I believe.
Hopefully somebody can find the quote from the many publications,
I will also keep looking.
I adore Blues in the Morning, but it couldn't have been one take with Keith on bass, piano, guitar and vocals.
I reckon Steve meant the basic jam was done in 15 minutes, but which instrument was Keith playing for that?
Quote
with sssoul
Well maybe but who the heck uses "today's technology"?!
In my circles it's done the right way, primarily because we can't afford anything else :E
Do you reckon Bobby (love & light!) was part of the original Blues in the Morning jam or added later?
And: I love Keith's singing on this! Really really loose inside :E
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Turner68Quote
DandelionPowderman
People are obviously fans of the Stones for different reasons, and we have learned the last few weeks that Keith Richards's playing and singing not necessarily has anything to do with why others like the Stones. Quite on the contrary, a couple of years ago people were playing with the thought of replacing him!
For me that is baffling, but my reasons for loving the Stones are probably baffling to others as well
there is a lot of diversity. for me, the biggest surprise is the number of people who don't seem to be fans of the "classic stones" - i.e. the brian jones era. and also i'm surprised to learn that there are fans of their recent albums. part of what makes it fun to come here and chat about stuff. it would be boring if we all agreed.
The first thing is surprising indeed. That there are many fans of the latter-day Stones, not so much, imo. They are still active and blow most of their contemporaries out of the water
Quote
HairballQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Turner68Quote
DandelionPowderman
People are obviously fans of the Stones for different reasons, and we have learned the last few weeks that Keith Richards's playing and singing not necessarily has anything to do with why others like the Stones. Quite on the contrary, a couple of years ago people were playing with the thought of replacing him!
For me that is baffling, but my reasons for loving the Stones are probably baffling to others as well
there is a lot of diversity. for me, the biggest surprise is the number of people who don't seem to be fans of the "classic stones" - i.e. the brian jones era. and also i'm surprised to learn that there are fans of their recent albums. part of what makes it fun to come here and chat about stuff. it would be boring if we all agreed.
The first thing is surprising indeed. That there are many fans of the latter-day Stones, not so much, imo. They are still active and blow most of their contemporaries out of the water
Genrally speaking, it could have something to do with an age gap. Being the age I am (born in '63), it was sort of absorbed and embedded in me during my formative years when my brain was still forming (which it still is lol), whereas say people in their '30's might not have had that same experience of living through it all and therefore don't have the same connection and/or appreciation.
That could also explain why some of the younger ones - say in their 20's - have a much better appreciation of latter day Stones.
Again generally speaking as I know there are some older fogies who like it as well. Just an assumption, but seems to make some sense.
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
HairballQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Turner68Quote
DandelionPowderman
People are obviously fans of the Stones for different reasons, and we have learned the last few weeks that Keith Richards's playing and singing not necessarily has anything to do with why others like the Stones. Quite on the contrary, a couple of years ago people were playing with the thought of replacing him!
For me that is baffling, but my reasons for loving the Stones are probably baffling to others as well
there is a lot of diversity. for me, the biggest surprise is the number of people who don't seem to be fans of the "classic stones" - i.e. the brian jones era. and also i'm surprised to learn that there are fans of their recent albums. part of what makes it fun to come here and chat about stuff. it would be boring if we all agreed.
The first thing is surprising indeed. That there are many fans of the latter-day Stones, not so much, imo. They are still active and blow most of their contemporaries out of the water
Genrally speaking, it could have something to do with an age gap. Being the age I am (born in '63), it was sort of absorbed and embedded in me during my formative years when my brain was still forming (which it still is lol), whereas say people in their '30's might not have had that same experience of living through it all and therefore don't have the same connection and/or appreciation.
That could also explain why some of the younger ones - say in their 20's - have a much better appreciation of latter day Stones.
Again generally speaking as I know there are some older fogies who like it as well. Just an assumption, but seems to make some sense.
My experience is that a lot of Brian era fans like today's Stones
Quote
Hairball
Yes, yes, yes indeed... there is a small percentage that do.
Quote
Hairball
If I'm not mistaken, it was Substantial Damage that was done in 15 minutes - one take.
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Jimmy also produced two Brian era albums.
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
DandelionPowderman
Jimmy also produced two Brian era albums.
Yeah but Jones was essentially not on those...
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
DandelionPowderman
Jimmy also produced two Brian era albums.
Yeah but Jones was essentially not on those...
That's a stretch for BB, isn't it? He also plays on LIB (MR and YGTS).
Keith dominated the guitar department, though.
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
DandelionPowderman
Jimmy also produced two Brian era albums.
Yeah but Jones was essentially not on those...
That's a stretch for BB, isn't it? He also plays on LIB (MR and YGTS).
Keith dominated the guitar department, though.
Hmmmm. Maybe. You're right, he's on a good bit of BB. He played guitar on No Expectations, from what I can see the only song he played guitar on. Mellotron on a few tunes. He's credited with backing vocals on SFTD... harmonica on a few songs. Sitar and tamboura on SFM.
Ha ha - I guess I forgot he did all that on BB!
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Jimmy also produced two Brian era albums.
Quote
His MajestyQuote
DandelionPowderman
Jimmy also produced two Brian era albums.
Seems wonky to define LIB as Brian era album, but considering the majority of the music was recorded before Brian officially left the band I guess it kind of is.
Beggars Banquet feels more like a natural conclusion of the Brian era for me due to the sheer lack of sonic and emotional affect or influence Brian had on LIB.
Quote
Turner68
People often do. Sometimes people even think that it was Taylor coming on board that was responsible for the greatness of the big 4, when that is clearly not the case since he wasn't on BB and just did a couple overdubs on LIB! I think you're right in that Jimmy Miller is big part of the answer.