Quote
Taylor1
It should have been played live over the years.It only managed to be played a couple of times in 1973.

Agree with you. Played twice I think in Vienna and Mannheim. After looking on
[rocksoff.org]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2023-05-21 23:28 by Christiaan.

Here's Vienna.




Mannheim starting at 22:15

One of those GHS tracks that just sounds better and better as the years go by. The album is full of true gems. Hidden or not.

A nice video.

- Doxa

I have always felt that Mick was channeling the english romantic poets with that song. With that in mind the video doesn't make much sense.
Great song!!
Rockandroll,
Mops

Yeah thats right rollmops....

Great song .... video poor .....



ROCKMAN

I started liking the video near the end. Think they don’t put much effort in these, which makes me wonder why they make them.

Tasty video, great lyrics, and even more: a beautiful song. Everything rhymes.

A pity I cannot hear Keith's guitar on the two live versions. Poor audio.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-05-22 12:47 by TheflyingDutchman.

Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Tasty video, great lyrics, and even more: a beautiful song. Everything rhymes.

A pity I cannot hear Keith's guitar on the two live versions. Poor audio.

What cam you expect of audience recording of 1973? Or any audience recording. Just fine they circle around

Quote
Christiaan

Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Tasty video, great lyrics, and even more: a beautiful song. Everything rhymes.

A pity I cannot hear Keith's guitar on the two live versions. Poor audio.

What cam you expect of audience recording of 1973? Or any audience recording. Just fine they circle around

A bootleg listener needs trained ears and a good imagination. She hears something and then imagines the rest.

- Doxa

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Christiaan

Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Tasty video, great lyrics, and even more: a beautiful song. Everything rhymes.

A pity I cannot hear Keith's guitar on the two live versions. Poor audio.

What cam you expect of audience recording of 1973? Or any audience recording. Just fine they circle around

A bootleg listener needs trained ears and a good imagination. She hears something and then imagines the rest.

- Doxa

That's quite to the point

- sorry



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-07-07 22:55 by wiredallnight.

WtF

]well said

just awful random nonsense that has nothing remotely to do with the lyrics or music

Taylor’s solo is great.

Quote
Taylor1
Taylor’s solo is great.

Best audio recording to me.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Christiaan

Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Tasty video, great lyrics, and even more: a beautiful song. Everything rhymes.

A pity I cannot hear Keith's guitar on the two live versions. Poor audio.

What cam you expect of audience recording of 1973? Or any audience recording. Just fine they circle around

A bootleg listener needs trained ears and a good imagination. She hears something and then imagines the rest.

- Doxa

What a great statement.

Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Here's Vienna.




Mannheim starting at 22:15

That Vienna version is smokin! It sounds great. I don’t know why they stopped playing it

Quote
Reagan

Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Here's Vienna.




Mannheim starting at 22:15

That Vienna version is smokin! It sounds great. I don’t know why they stopped playing it

Very sad they didn’t played 100 Years Ago more often, great great, very great song!! Very good album too, Goats Head Soup.

I like this version as well:

Quote
Taylor1
Taylor’s solo is great.

His playing during the verses is also very effective and tasty.

He probably deserved a writers credit for the music since without his playing the song would have wound up like the piano demo.Look at the writer credits Andrew Watts got on Hackney Dismonds.I doubt he contributed more than Taylor did to some of the songs he played on.

..great singing version by Mick and piano on "Goat head soup" de luxe double album..

Quote
Taylor1
He probably deserved a writers credit for the music since without his playing the song would have wound up like the piano demo.Look at the writer credits Andrew Watts got on Hackney Dismonds.I doubt he contributed more than Taylor did to some of the songs he played on.

I think that Jagger and Richards (and most Stones fans) have a different view on songwriting credits, and who deserves it. The Rolling Stones are no prog rock band where every individual member gets credited, no matter who wrote the main theme or score. It's the prog rock alike Stones music where Taylor was complaining about.. TWFNO , Moonlight Mile, and maybe even 100 Years ago. As long as Richards and Jagger share the stage, stadiums will sell out called "the Rolling Stones" . That's the Crux behind the story. No brilliant session player helping them, writing or arranging songs does matter. There were quite a few though. They will get no penny for songwriting. There's no guilty person involved either. Jagger has the last word. Keith backing him up as his ancient trademark guitarist and co-songwriter.The rest is history. Or even the future.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2024-10-13 23:03 by TheflyingDutchman.

Quote
TheflyingDutchman

Quote
Taylor1
He probably deserved a writers credit for the music since without his playing the song would have wound up like the piano demo.Look at the writer credits Andrew Watts got on Hackney Dismonds.I doubt he contributed more than Taylor did to some of the songs he played on.

I think that Jagger and Richards (and most Stones fans) have a different view on songwriting credits, and who deserves it. The Rolling Stones are no prog rock band where every individual member gets credited, no matter who wrote the main theme or score. It's the prog rock alike Stones music where Taylor was complaining about.. TWFNO , Moonlight Mile, and maybe even 100 Years ago. As long as Richards and Jagger share the stage, stadiums will sell out called "the Rolling Stones" . That's the Crux behind the story. No brilliant session player helping them, writing or arranging songs does matter. There were quite a few though. They will get no penny for songwriting. There's no guilty person involved either. Jagger has the last word. Keith backing him up as his ancient trademark guitarist and co-songwriter.The rest is history. Or even the future.

Well, Watt did get songwriting credits on HD. He must be a tough bloke

Quote
Taylor1
He probably deserved a writers credit for the music since without his playing the song would have wound up like the piano demo.Look at the writer credits Andrew Watts got on Hackney Dismonds.I doubt he contributed more than Taylor did to some of the songs he played on.

Why would Taylor deserve a credit for playing a competent solo in Dminor with phrases that follow the vocal melody, over a song written completely by somebody else?

'Some of the songs we used (for the album) were pretty old. 100 Years Ago was one that Mick (Jagger) had written 2 years ago and which we hadn't really got around to using before'. - Mick Taylor, 1973

If anyone would have deserved a credit more than Richards it would have been Billy Preston:

'I mean, the rhythmic stuff, like the stuff on Criss Cross, that’s Billy Preston and Nicky (Hopkins). The fashion at that time was playing the clavinet with the wah-wah stuff, and that gives it this certain push. It’s not Herbie Hancock exactly. (You can hear it) on 100 Years Ago and then Criss Cross...'- Mick Jagger, August 2020

Mathijs



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-10-14 14:11 by Mathijs.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Well, Watt did get songwriting credits on HD. He must be a tough bloke

Exceptions make the rule.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
TheflyingDutchman

Quote
Taylor1
He probably deserved a writers credit for the music since without his playing the song would have wound up like the piano demo.Look at the writer credits Andrew Watts got on Hackney Dismonds.I doubt he contributed more than Taylor did to some of the songs he played on.

I think that Jagger and Richards (and most Stones fans) have a different view on songwriting credits, and who deserves it. The Rolling Stones are no prog rock band where every individual member gets credited, no matter who wrote the main theme or score. It's the prog rock alike Stones music where Taylor was complaining about.. TWFNO , Moonlight Mile, and maybe even 100 Years ago. As long as Richards and Jagger share the stage, stadiums will sell out called "the Rolling Stones" . That's the Crux behind the story. No brilliant session player helping them, writing or arranging songs does matter. There were quite a few though. They will get no penny for songwriting. There's no guilty person involved either. Jagger has the last word. Keith backing him up as his ancient trademark guitarist and co-songwriter.The rest is history. Or even the future.

Well, Watt did get songwriting credits on HD. He must be a tough bloke

Compare the financials of 1973 Mick Jagger to 2023 Mick Jagger and there is your answer.

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Taylor1
He probably deserved a writers credit for the music since without his playing the song would have wound up like the piano demo.Look at the writer credits Andrew Watts got on Hackney Dismonds.I doubt he contributed more than Taylor did to some of the songs he played on.

Why would Taylor deserve a credit for playing a competent solo in Dminor with phrases that follow the vocal melody, over a song written completely by somebody else?

'Some of the songs we used (for the album) were pretty old. 100 Years Ago was one that Mick (Jagger) had written 2 years ago and which we hadn't really got around to using before'. - Mick Taylor, 1973

If anyone would have deserved a credit more than Richards it would have been Billy Preston:

'I mean, the rhythmic stuff, like the stuff on Criss Cross, that’s Billy Preston and Nicky (Hopkins). The fashion at that time was playing the clavinet with the wah-wah stuff, and that gives it this certain push. It’s not Herbie Hancock exactly. (You can hear it) on 100 Years Ago and then Criss Cross...'- Mick Jagger, August 2020

Mathijs

I agree, and this was one of the things pointed out by KR, if I recall. After Preston and the Stones parted ways, he said something to the effect of Billy Preston changed the songs too much. They went through the Billy Preston filter when he was there at basic tracking.

I never heard Billy Preston complain about credits, probably because he had a semi-successful solo career. I think the credits would have gone a lot further for Taylor, plus there is his side of the story where Jagger verbally promised credits and didn't follow through. This would upset anyone.

All that said, I've never heard Taylor say he had a strong hand in the composition of 100 Years Ago.

Quote
TravelinMan

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
TheflyingDutchman

Quote
Taylor1
He probably deserved a writers credit for the music since without his playing the song would have wound up like the piano demo.Look at the writer credits Andrew Watts got on Hackney Dismonds.I doubt he contributed more than Taylor did to some of the songs he played on.

I think that Jagger and Richards (and most Stones fans) have a different view on songwriting credits, and who deserves it. The Rolling Stones are no prog rock band where every individual member gets credited, no matter who wrote the main theme or score. It's the prog rock alike Stones music where Taylor was complaining about.. TWFNO , Moonlight Mile, and maybe even 100 Years ago. As long as Richards and Jagger share the stage, stadiums will sell out called "the Rolling Stones" . That's the Crux behind the story. No brilliant session player helping them, writing or arranging songs does matter. There were quite a few though. They will get no penny for songwriting. There's no guilty person involved either. Jagger has the last word. Keith backing him up as his ancient trademark guitarist and co-songwriter.The rest is history. Or even the future.

Well, Watt did get songwriting credits on HD. He must be a tough bloke

Compare the financials of 1973 Mick Jagger to 2023 Mick Jagger and there is your answer.

It's not like he has handed out credits willingly since 1989, either, so ...

GHS was a big seller, btw, so no doubt he could have afforded it back then as well

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
TravelinMan

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
TheflyingDutchman

Quote
Taylor1
He probably deserved a writers credit for the music since without his playing the song would have wound up like the piano demo.Look at the writer credits Andrew Watts got on Hackney Dismonds.I doubt he contributed more than Taylor did to some of the songs he played on.

I think that Jagger and Richards (and most Stones fans) have a different view on songwriting credits, and who deserves it. The Rolling Stones are no prog rock band where every individual member gets credited, no matter who wrote the main theme or score. It's the prog rock alike Stones music where Taylor was complaining about.. TWFNO , Moonlight Mile, and maybe even 100 Years ago. As long as Richards and Jagger share the stage, stadiums will sell out called "the Rolling Stones" . That's the Crux behind the story. No brilliant session player helping them, writing or arranging songs does matter. There were quite a few though. They will get no penny for songwriting. There's no guilty person involved either. Jagger has the last word. Keith backing him up as his ancient trademark guitarist and co-songwriter.The rest is history. Or even the future.

Well, Watt did get songwriting credits on HD. He must be a tough bloke

Compare the financials of 1973 Mick Jagger to 2023 Mick Jagger and there is your answer.

It's not like he has handed out credits willingly since 1989, either, so ...

GHS was a big seller, btw, so no doubt he could have afforded it back then as well

The financials coupled with the still lingering issues with ABKCO vs now where he owns mansions across the world? C'mon, it's not even close. Nobody was getting credit in 1973.