That said a song like Midnight Rambler clearly based on sessions with Ry and Mick and Bill made up for a great part of the song (the guitars are clearly there except for the Berryish slow riffing - crucial of course). And at the same time Mick and Keith wrote the song (chords and one assumes, the main opening main riff, the words and theme). It's Keiths and Micks song - but it's also heavily based on stuff ry played and stuff that emerged from some jam sessions. Again, nothing wrong in that and the guitars are totally dependent on Keith Richards being at his best. As he was in 1969. I know somebody's gonna say something about Berry or Hooker now but of course it's different if you are a famous band and invite some unknown guy, record him and then use that on your record.

It's not clearly based on that session

Quote
matxil

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
keefriff99

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
keefriff99

Quote
keefriffhard4life
why do people think the 3 big ballads from get a grip sound the same? crazy is very mellow sounding compared to crying

I've seen people claim that...makes no sense to me. All three songs are unique in sound.

They all have the same melody.

I guess, but Crylin' starts with heavy drums and electric guitar, Crazy has mandolin and harmonica, and Amazing has strings and piano. The choruses are all sung similarly, but other than that...

Cryin' has harmonica, too

Doesn't matter. A buddy and I, after that third single came out, were walking around and for whatever reason one of us started making fun of it by adding the other two songs into it. His reaction was "Jesus! They're all the same song!"

Exactly. Same here.

And... they basically did the same video three times for those singles!

Quote
Redhotcarpet
That said a song like Midnight Rambler clearly based on sessions with Ry and Mick and Bill made up for a great part of the song (the guitars are clearly there except for the Berryish slow riffing - crucial of course). And at the same time Mick and Keith wrote the song (chords and one assumes, the main opening main riff, the words and theme). It's Keiths and Micks song - but it's also heavily based on stuff ry played and stuff that emerged from some jam sessions. Again, nothing wrong in that and the guitars are totally dependent on Keith Richards being at his best. As he was in 1969. I know somebody's gonna say something about Berry or Hooker now but of course it's different if you are a famous band and invite some unknown guy, record him and then use that on your record.

Yeah, "Midnight Rambler" is an interesting case. Actually just a moment ago, I started to think about that song due to a theme discussed in some other thread (the upcoming album thread) - that of different 'methods' the band uses in making records. If memory serves, Jagger has said that they wrote the song with Keith together during their holiday in Italy, and that they worked the whole song through - all the different parts, tempo changes and everything. This means to say - if true - that they had a rather finished song when they hitted the studio and introduced it to others. However, I agree with you that there is a lot of - or at least some - that Ry Cooder influence to be heard in the final version - similar to some jamming stuff in JAMMING WITH EDWARD. Is it just a co-incidental or were, say, Mick and Keith somehow 'inspired' by the stuff they heard Cooder doing with them before even traveling to Italy, or did the influence somehow derived at the process of developing the song in a studio into a final form - there was 'Cooder' in the air, so to say? No idea about the 'right' answer if there is one...

- Doxa

That era is interesting. The thing is that even the major notes in the uptempo part are the same as the ones Ry played on a couple of those Rambler-like numbers. Keith did his thing with that but it's easy to hear what he based it on.

Its unfair to compare any band to Lennon/McCartney. They "Song Doctored" each others stuff.

Producers get points. There's arrangers, managers, girlfriends/boyfriends, loads of people have input to how songs end up. Dylan depended on his studio band's alchemy & quick thinking to synthesize vibes. Without Jimmy Miller the Stones Golden Mid-Period probably would have been only their silver, Period. Song writing to me is more than the lyrics and C-D-G chords. (Unless yr a singer-songwriter-guitarist.)

I think they had help from Don Was with construction & "THAT'S it!!". But NO outside people get in on their action… all expenses are covered, wages/drugs/percs are given & thats where it has always ended with those two. No credit to no one. Mick's a scrooge and Keith, looks the other way. They are USERS.

Mick and Keith would rather have turds than: great songs and more names underneath the title. (It would tarnish the Rolling Stones image… rather, i mean Legacy.) Also I think "song doctor" is a dumb term. The song is done when you stop working on it, 96% of the time. As they say… painting are abandoned, not finished. (Um, Dylan anyone?) Doom and Gloom had outside "influence". Betcha. If the Stones had WAY WAY WAY LESS MONEY in mid-80's they would have done it in a heartbeat. or less. Rod Stewart did it in a way, and he was ROLLING in money. (Crass but honest in a pathetic way.) He knew he was tapped out.

I worship the Stones, but i have no respect for Jagger. Keith has lost it for me since he became a cartoon of himself. They sleep like babies though. And their 1990's> records SOUND like crap. Just my 2 cents…

Heresy ! You will soon be run out of town on a pole by villagers with torches.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-12-15 17:56 by Bungo.

no