Tell Me :
Talk
THANK YOU VERY MUCH!!!!!
You'll like this :
"Considering how focused ABKCO are on the financial advertanges and the fact that exactly 17 studio songs were the ones released on Youtube, there is enough proof here to guess that those songs/versions were planned/considered for a probable bonus disc on the 50th Let It Bleed boxed set.
I’m only guessing here, but why exactly those chosen songs/versions, a substantial portion of them never heard/bootlegged before?
My guess is that these 17 songs were presented to The Stones, who then nixed a release of them.
It is known Jagger/Richards were presented with Beggars Banquet outtakes for consideration of a release last year. Sadly, that didn’t came out either, except for a copyright dump on Youtube last year, exactly as has happend now"
Source : [forums.stevehoffman.tv]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-01-03 11:41 by dcba.
They seemingly do care, and that seems to be the problem. As far as I can see there are two possibilities:
A. They think the stuff from the vaults is subpar. Or that releasing such material per se is not their 'thing'.
B. They don't want ABKCO gain any extra cent from them, even though that would cost them a dollar or two.
"A" doesn't hold much water, me thinks. They've released such material already. Would they own their Decca era material, most likely we would have seen proper deluxe versions of such career-defining albums as BEGGARS BANQUET and LET IT BLEED (probably AFTERMATH too, or bloody every album of the 60's hitting the 50th Anniversary, a'la The Beatles).
So we are left with 'B'. That is a pure business-decision, which loses them money in short-time, but they seemingly are after a long-term win: getting their catalogue back some day. Meanwhile they make the life of ABKCO as miserable as possible as they can - every Anniversary thing is a wasted opportunity for Klein's label. It could be that it is not exactly an issue of money (since both the Stones and ABKCO are losing money there, and the value of that material is no doubt decreasing every year as the potential customers are not gettting any younger) but more that of ego: Mick and the Stones are still angry for Klein (and for themselves of their stupidity at the time) and seriously frustrated about the fact that they don't control a seminal body of their work (one can only imagine, no matter how much they give the impression of 'not looking back', how much it hurts them. In terms of pure money, I can only guess that every time they negotiate a new deal for their back catalogue, they are painfully awere of what is the difference between starting from 1971 than that of 1964...).
Be the truth whatever, a fact is that we fans are the real losers here. Mathijs above impressed very well the sentiments...
- Doxa
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-01-03 12:59 by Doxa.
All non-MSG tracks are from known audience-sourced recordings, some of them worse than what is circulating (e.g. Altamont is running slow).
The MSG material is mixed from the original multitracks and, just like the studio recordings, sounds like it has been prepared for official release but was nixed for whatever reason. E.g. as part of a 50th anniversary package: three 28-11 1st tracks to fill out the original Ya-Ya´s Album disc and two bonus dics with the full 27-11 and 28-11 2nd gigs.
I am suprised that Baltimore 26-11 was not included since we know this performance was also professionally recorded. Maybe the tapes are lost / damaged.
The Altamont multitracks do exist and are out there with the original owner but not in the band´s or ABKCO´s posession AFAIK. In Addition to the audio in the Gimme Shelter movie, a full Version of the multitrack Gimme Shelter has been circulating in excellent quality for a long time.
The Altamont clips which have been leaked through the Chris M Website are NOT from the multitracks. They are dubs from a soundboard / mixing desk source and are vastly inferior sounding (unbalanced, drums mixed way too low, vocals too high) compared to the excellent multitrack source recordings.
Yes and I haven't uploaded it as there is no upgrade at all. Bootlegs or circulating remasters are better.
HMN
Drums and the absolutely fantastic sounding acoustic as well.
Mathijs
Yep, that track was the biggest and happiest surprise, IMHO. No way that was recorded in '66 as some people here suggested.
That sounds very reasonable!
I don’t believe the MSG shows were prepared for release. There’s just too much in between chattering and tuning up, and many tracks are just too out of tune to release. It’s actually quite a feat, to mix and edit three shows down to the final released Ya Ya’s, still preserving the energy of the live shows.
Mathijs
You might be right there. But as was mentioned above, we the fans are the ones losing out.
Strange though that they did release the Ya-Ya's box back in 2010, and the R 'n' R Circus way back in '96. Why didn't the Stones nix those as well? A bit of a mystery for sure.
for sure it is from around 1969...the way charlie doing the breaks (and the overall drum sound) is very similar to the "jamming with edward" stuff - and this is from 1969 (let it bleed sessions) for sure...
Question:
Is it multitracks to the songs in the movie that you are refearing to, or the song GS? -And if it's not the song: are these tracks all complete songs, ie. no cuts, and without other audio mixed in (like audience noise)?
"Hear that? You hear that? That's OUR rough song drafts they are using right there! Oh we got em by the balls now"
The point makes itself...
I am referring to the performance of the song.
It was released along with two undoctored Ya-Ya´s tracks on the 1990 Bootleg CD "A Shot of Salvation". Street Fighting Man from 28-11 1st without the vocal overdubs and original vocal intact and Love In Vain from 26-11 with Mick´s pre-song chat included.
[www.discogs.com]
Gimme Shelter is different from the edited version which plays during the Gimme Shelter movie credits at the end. It is the full performance with Keith´s intro, all verses and both Keith guitar solos included as well as Mick and Keith pre-song talk ("One of you can chill one little girl..." "Come on fellas don´t riot").
It´s worth seeking out and the track gives a good indication of what a complete and professionally mixed multitrack Altamont sounds like.
The full edit is also on Youtube but in compressed audio and without pre-song talk:
[youtu.be]
Hope this helps...
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
johnnythunders
()
Date: January 3, 2020 01:12
For some reason this WT link is not working for me,though I managed to access the studio tracks in this way. Did you manage to get all of Altamont?Quote
HonestmanQuote
johnnythunders
Did any kind soul manage to grab the Altamont recording? Intrigued to hear what the 'official' version sounds like compared to all the other versions...
Thanks in advance
Here's Gimme Shelter
wetransfer
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
johnnythunders
()
Date: January 3, 2020 03:20
Have now managed to download 11 tracks from Altamont so certainly not the whole gig and in worse sound than most recent bootlegs (some tracks such as Gimme Shelter are better quality). I guess this proves that no-one has a high quality recording of the whole gig. Shame because they played surprisingly well including two songs never played before.
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
jbwelda
()
Date: January 3, 2020 03:45
actually, Owsley Stanley foundation do have soundboard masters of the entire day. Very doubtful they will ever see the day but check out Bears Sonic Journals for any hope from that corner.
also, my download of the msg shows stalled at 69% (a message there?) and has been in a holding pattern for a couple hours now. kind of a bummer.
jb
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-01-03 03:46 by jbwelda.
also, my download of the msg shows stalled at 69% (a message there?) and has been in a holding pattern for a couple hours now. kind of a bummer.
jb
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-01-03 03:46 by jbwelda.
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
floodonthepage
()
Date: January 3, 2020 04:07
I can't find a link to the studio tracks on any of these threads floating around, just the '69 live shows. Sorry if I missed something obvious.
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
exilestones
()
Date: January 3, 2020 04:36
Quote
floodonthepage
I can't find a link to the studio tracks on any of these threads floating around, just the '69 live shows. Sorry if I missed something obvious.
Quote
blakeeik
Here's all 16 studio tracks without the tone in flac.
I used a different method to remove the tone. I did not compare the two.
Thanks to Honestman and Blueranger! A great find
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
floodonthepage
()
Date: January 3, 2020 05:06
Quote
exilestonesQuote
floodonthepage
I can't find a link to the studio tracks on any of these threads floating around, just the '69 live shows. Sorry if I missed something obvious.Quote
blakeeik
Here's all 16 studio tracks without the tone in flac.
I used a different method to remove the tone. I did not compare the two.
Thanks to Honestman and Blueranger! A great find
THANK YOU VERY MUCH!!!!!
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
Nasty Habits
()
Date: January 3, 2020 10:15
To me most of the live tracks don't sound like soundboard recordings. In fact they sound like they are the first gen tapes of the shows that have been circulating on bootleg, Ft Collins and Miami for example sounds exactly the same as the copies that I've had for years.
MSG 27th sounds like the audience mic source that they used for the recording of Ya Ya's. Perhaps the majority of these recordings are from audience mic sources. If that's the case no doubt soundboard versions exist of these shows as well. It would make sense that they would only upload the lesser quality versions of these recordings and not the soundboard versions.
Whats everyone's thoughts on this?
"I've got nasty habits I take tea at three"
MSG 27th sounds like the audience mic source that they used for the recording of Ya Ya's. Perhaps the majority of these recordings are from audience mic sources. If that's the case no doubt soundboard versions exist of these shows as well. It would make sense that they would only upload the lesser quality versions of these recordings and not the soundboard versions.
Whats everyone's thoughts on this?
"I've got nasty habits I take tea at three"
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
dcba
()
Date: January 3, 2020 11:40
Quote
Mathijs
an official statement from my side: @#$%& the Rolling Stones. @#$%& them deep and hard. I will never ever spent one more cent to this godawfull money grabbing bunch of @#$%&. They give us a mono let it bleed, a Ya Ya’s out with one extra track, while they have all this in the can.
@#$%& you Rolling Stones. Sure go on tour this year to suck the last pennies wherever you can. But @#$%& you.
Mathijs
You'll like this :
"Considering how focused ABKCO are on the financial advertanges and the fact that exactly 17 studio songs were the ones released on Youtube, there is enough proof here to guess that those songs/versions were planned/considered for a probable bonus disc on the 50th Let It Bleed boxed set.
I’m only guessing here, but why exactly those chosen songs/versions, a substantial portion of them never heard/bootlegged before?
My guess is that these 17 songs were presented to The Stones, who then nixed a release of them.
It is known Jagger/Richards were presented with Beggars Banquet outtakes for consideration of a release last year. Sadly, that didn’t came out either, except for a copyright dump on Youtube last year, exactly as has happend now"
Source : [forums.stevehoffman.tv]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-01-03 11:41 by dcba.
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: January 3, 2020 12:57
Quote
GasLightStreet
On subject anyway, why the hell would they care when they've put out 3589 greatest hits comps and only play old songs?
A. Family time
B. They love being like the Beach Boys
C. There's at least an additional 40 songs being added to the new album they're recording so they don't want any distractions from the new material being talked about.
4. They want nothing to get in the way of 2022's SIXTY RIFFS THE VERY BEST OF THE ROLLING STONES! hits album via 18 formats in 10 different versions, 8 of them all different, the 9th being 120 songs and the 10th being 160 songs.
Is that why?
They seemingly do care, and that seems to be the problem. As far as I can see there are two possibilities:
A. They think the stuff from the vaults is subpar. Or that releasing such material per se is not their 'thing'.
B. They don't want ABKCO gain any extra cent from them, even though that would cost them a dollar or two.
"A" doesn't hold much water, me thinks. They've released such material already. Would they own their Decca era material, most likely we would have seen proper deluxe versions of such career-defining albums as BEGGARS BANQUET and LET IT BLEED (probably AFTERMATH too, or bloody every album of the 60's hitting the 50th Anniversary, a'la The Beatles).
So we are left with 'B'. That is a pure business-decision, which loses them money in short-time, but they seemingly are after a long-term win: getting their catalogue back some day. Meanwhile they make the life of ABKCO as miserable as possible as they can - every Anniversary thing is a wasted opportunity for Klein's label. It could be that it is not exactly an issue of money (since both the Stones and ABKCO are losing money there, and the value of that material is no doubt decreasing every year as the potential customers are not gettting any younger) but more that of ego: Mick and the Stones are still angry for Klein (and for themselves of their stupidity at the time) and seriously frustrated about the fact that they don't control a seminal body of their work (one can only imagine, no matter how much they give the impression of 'not looking back', how much it hurts them. In terms of pure money, I can only guess that every time they negotiate a new deal for their back catalogue, they are painfully awere of what is the difference between starting from 1971 than that of 1964...).
Be the truth whatever, a fact is that we fans are the real losers here. Mathijs above impressed very well the sentiments...
- Doxa
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-01-03 12:59 by Doxa.
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
Tornandfrayed
()
Date: January 3, 2020 12:58
Quote
Nasty Habits
To me most of the live tracks don't sound like soundboard recordings. In fact they sound like they are the first gen tapes of the shows that have been circulating on bootleg, Ft Collins and Miami for example sounds exactly the same as the copies that I've had for years.
MSG 27th sounds like the audience mic source that they used for the recording of Ya Ya's. Perhaps the majority of these recordings are from audience mic sources. If that's the case no doubt soundboard versions exist of these shows as well. It would make sense that they would only upload the lesser quality versions of these recordings and not the soundboard versions.
Whats everyone's thoughts on this?
All non-MSG tracks are from known audience-sourced recordings, some of them worse than what is circulating (e.g. Altamont is running slow).
The MSG material is mixed from the original multitracks and, just like the studio recordings, sounds like it has been prepared for official release but was nixed for whatever reason. E.g. as part of a 50th anniversary package: three 28-11 1st tracks to fill out the original Ya-Ya´s Album disc and two bonus dics with the full 27-11 and 28-11 2nd gigs.
I am suprised that Baltimore 26-11 was not included since we know this performance was also professionally recorded. Maybe the tapes are lost / damaged.
The Altamont multitracks do exist and are out there with the original owner but not in the band´s or ABKCO´s posession AFAIK. In Addition to the audio in the Gimme Shelter movie, a full Version of the multitrack Gimme Shelter has been circulating in excellent quality for a long time.
The Altamont clips which have been leaked through the Chris M Website are NOT from the multitracks. They are dubs from a soundboard / mixing desk source and are vastly inferior sounding (unbalanced, drums mixed way too low, vocals too high) compared to the excellent multitrack source recordings.
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
Honestman
()
Date: January 3, 2020 13:53
Quote
johnnythunders
...Did you manage to get all of Altamont?
Yes and I haven't uploaded it as there is no upgrade at all. Bootlegs or circulating remasters are better.
HMN
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
Nikkei
()
Date: January 3, 2020 14:04
There is next to no cash to be made here. Their attitude towards Abcko is purely based on principle and in my opinion they are absolutely right. This company always was a sore pimple on the buttocks of the record industry.
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
astmalia
()
Date: January 3, 2020 14:23
In my ears, the sound of the piano in RT is the same as SFTD.
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
Mathijs
()
Date: January 3, 2020 15:42
Quote
astmalia
In my ears, the sound of the piano in RT is the same as SFTD.
Drums and the absolutely fantastic sounding acoustic as well.
Mathijs
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
LieB
()
Date: January 3, 2020 15:46
Quote
MathijsQuote
astmalia
In my ears, the sound of the piano in RT is the same as SFTD.
Drums and the absolutely fantastic sounding acoustic as well.
Mathijs
Yep, that track was the biggest and happiest surprise, IMHO. No way that was recorded in '66 as some people here suggested.
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
LieB
()
Date: January 3, 2020 15:48
Quote
TornandfrayedQuote
Nasty Habits
To me most of the live tracks don't sound like soundboard recordings. In fact they sound like they are the first gen tapes of the shows that have been circulating on bootleg, Ft Collins and Miami for example sounds exactly the same as the copies that I've had for years.
MSG 27th sounds like the audience mic source that they used for the recording of Ya Ya's. Perhaps the majority of these recordings are from audience mic sources. If that's the case no doubt soundboard versions exist of these shows as well. It would make sense that they would only upload the lesser quality versions of these recordings and not the soundboard versions.
Whats everyone's thoughts on this?
All non-MSG tracks are from known audience-sourced recordings, some of them worse than what is circulating (e.g. Altamont is running slow).
The MSG material is mixed from the original multitracks and, just like the studio recordings, sounds like it has been prepared for official release but was nixed for whatever reason. E.g. as part of a 50th anniversary package: three 28-11 1st tracks to fill out the original Ya-Ya´s Album disc and two bonus dics with the full 27-11 and 28-11 2nd gigs.
I am suprised that Baltimore 26-11 was not included since we know this performance was also professionally recorded. Maybe the tapes are lost / damaged.
The Altamont multitracks do exist and are out there with the original owner but not in the band´s or ABKCO´s posession AFAIK. In Addition to the audio in the Gimme Shelter movie, a full Version of the multitrack Gimme Shelter has been circulating in excellent quality for a long time.
The Altamont clips which have been leaked through the Chris M Website are NOT from the multitracks. They are dubs from a soundboard / mixing desk source and are vastly inferior sounding (unbalanced, drums mixed way too low, vocals too high) compared to the excellent multitrack source recordings.
That sounds very reasonable!
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
Mathijs
()
Date: January 3, 2020 15:51
Quote
dcbaQuote
Mathijs
an official statement from my side: @#$%& the Rolling Stones. @#$%& them deep and hard. I will never ever spent one more cent to this godawfull money grabbing bunch of @#$%&. They give us a mono let it bleed, a Ya Ya’s out with one extra track, while they have all this in the can.
@#$%& you Rolling Stones. Sure go on tour this year to suck the last pennies wherever you can. But @#$%& you.
Mathijs
You'll like this :
"Considering how focused ABKCO are on the financial advertanges and the fact that exactly 17 studio songs were the ones released on Youtube, there is enough proof here to guess that those songs/versions were planned/considered for a probable bonus disc on the 50th Let It Bleed boxed set.
I’m only guessing here, but why exactly those chosen songs/versions, a substantial portion of them never heard/bootlegged before?
My guess is that these 17 songs were presented to The Stones, who then nixed a release of them.
It is known Jagger/Richards were presented with Beggars Banquet outtakes for consideration of a release last year. Sadly, that didn’t came out either, except for a copyright dump on Youtube last year, exactly as has happend now"
Source : [forums.stevehoffman.tv]
I don’t believe the MSG shows were prepared for release. There’s just too much in between chattering and tuning up, and many tracks are just too out of tune to release. It’s actually quite a feat, to mix and edit three shows down to the final released Ya Ya’s, still preserving the energy of the live shows.
Mathijs
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
LieB
()
Date: January 3, 2020 15:52
Quote
Nikkei
There is next to no cash to be made here. Their attitude towards Abcko is purely based on principle and in my opinion they are absolutely right. This company always was a sore pimple on the buttocks of the record industry.
You might be right there. But as was mentioned above, we the fans are the ones losing out.
Strange though that they did release the Ya-Ya's box back in 2010, and the R 'n' R Circus way back in '96. Why didn't the Stones nix those as well? A bit of a mystery for sure.
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
FoolToCry
()
Date: January 3, 2020 16:38
Quote
LieBQuote
MathijsQuote
astmalia
In my ears, the sound of the piano in RT is the same as SFTD.
Drums and the absolutely fantastic sounding acoustic as well.
Mathijs
Yep, that track was the biggest and happiest surprise, IMHO. No way that was recorded in '66 as some people here suggested.
for sure it is from around 1969...the way charlie doing the breaks (and the overall drum sound) is very similar to the "jamming with edward" stuff - and this is from 1969 (let it bleed sessions) for sure...
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
S.T.P
()
Date: January 3, 2020 17:41
Quote
Tornandfrayed
...In Addition to the audio in the Gimme Shelter movie, a full Version of the multitrack Gimme Shelter has been circulating in excellent quality for a long time.
Question:
Is it multitracks to the songs in the movie that you are refearing to, or the song GS? -And if it's not the song: are these tracks all complete songs, ie. no cuts, and without other audio mixed in (like audience noise)?
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
dcba
()
Date: January 3, 2020 17:50
"As part of the deal with Klein, the Stones had affirmed the validity of their publishing contract with ABKCO, which ended in 1970, and agreed not to record anything that Klein controlled until 1975.
But when the group released a new album in 1972, Exile on Main Street, some of the songs sounded familiar to executives at ABKCO. Klein had his assistant Paul Mozian spend a night in the studio comparing the cuts on the new album with unreleased tapes of tunes the Stones had worked on in the earlier years. Mozian came to the conclusion that the band had definitely written and worked on numerous songs on the new album when they were with ABKCO.
Since the songs had never been released, the Stones were free to record them and put them out now on Rolling Stones Records. But as Klein pointed out, they’d been written when Jagger and Richards were signed to ABKCO’s publishing company, Gideon Music. Klein, not Mick and Keith’s current publisher, EMI, was therefore the legal owner of the rights.
Not surprisingly, the Stones and their attorneys disagreed. In response, Klein ratcheted the argument up several notches with a claim that the Stones’ breach of settlement entitled him to put out another album of their music. He even had a title in mind; what did they think of Necrophilia? In short order, Klein and the Rolling Stones were back in court.
When the smoke cleared, ABKCO had the publishing rights to five additional songs: “Sweet Virginia,” “Loving Cup,” “All Down the Line,” “Shine a Light,” and “Stop Breaking Down,”* which meant Klein received a portion of royalties on Exile on Main Street. Additionally, ABKCO got to release another album, although cooler heads prevailed regarding the title; the album, coproduced by Andrew Loog Oldham, was eventually sold as More Hot Rocks (Big Hits and Fazed Cookies)."
From : "Allen Klein" by Fred Goodman (2015).
But when the group released a new album in 1972, Exile on Main Street, some of the songs sounded familiar to executives at ABKCO. Klein had his assistant Paul Mozian spend a night in the studio comparing the cuts on the new album with unreleased tapes of tunes the Stones had worked on in the earlier years. Mozian came to the conclusion that the band had definitely written and worked on numerous songs on the new album when they were with ABKCO.
Since the songs had never been released, the Stones were free to record them and put them out now on Rolling Stones Records. But as Klein pointed out, they’d been written when Jagger and Richards were signed to ABKCO’s publishing company, Gideon Music. Klein, not Mick and Keith’s current publisher, EMI, was therefore the legal owner of the rights.
Not surprisingly, the Stones and their attorneys disagreed. In response, Klein ratcheted the argument up several notches with a claim that the Stones’ breach of settlement entitled him to put out another album of their music. He even had a title in mind; what did they think of Necrophilia? In short order, Klein and the Rolling Stones were back in court.
When the smoke cleared, ABKCO had the publishing rights to five additional songs: “Sweet Virginia,” “Loving Cup,” “All Down the Line,” “Shine a Light,” and “Stop Breaking Down,”* which meant Klein received a portion of royalties on Exile on Main Street. Additionally, ABKCO got to release another album, although cooler heads prevailed regarding the title; the album, coproduced by Andrew Loog Oldham, was eventually sold as More Hot Rocks (Big Hits and Fazed Cookies)."
From : "Allen Klein" by Fred Goodman (2015).
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
Nikkei
()
Date: January 3, 2020 18:12
Quote
dcba
"But when the group released a new album in 1972, Exile on Main Street, some of the songs sounded familiar to executives at ABKCO. Klein had his assistant Paul Mozian spend a night in the studio comparing the cuts on the new album with unreleased tapes of tunes the Stones had worked on in the earlier years. Mozian came to the conclusion that the band had definitely written and worked on numerous songs on the new album when they were with ABKCO."
From : "Allen Klein" by Fred Goodman (2015).
"Hear that? You hear that? That's OUR rough song drafts they are using right there! Oh we got em by the balls now"
The point makes itself...
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
dcba
()
Date: January 3, 2020 18:27
"Klein had another odd win practically fall into his lap courtesy of the British rock band the Verve.
As Allen’s constant companion and longtime employee, Iris Keitel didn’t have to guess how he would react to a particular proposition or problem. When Jazz Summers, the manager of the British group the Verve, called in early 1997 to say the band wanted to get publishing clearance for a sample, Iris handled the situation. She told Summers that someone from the record company had already phoned and tried to low-ball ABKCO with an offer of 15 percent. “I’ve told him to @#$%& off, Jazz,” she said. “We don’t like people stealing our music. I’ve spoken to Allen. We’re not going to agree to this.”
Indeed, Klein was ultraprotective. ABKCO was happy to support writers who wanted to collaborate with other artists, but he saw sampling as a dilution of a work’s viability and didn’t want to encourage people to use samples and then negotiate retroactively.
That was precisely what the Verve’s musicians were trying to do. In this case, the sample, used in a song entitled “Bitter Sweet Symphony,” was taken from an instrumental version of the Rolling Stones song “The Last Time” that had appeared on an album by the Andrew Loog Oldham Orchestra.
The Verve had cleared the rights to sample the recording from Decca Records, but they hadn’t thought about getting permission for the underlying composition until after the fact. The irony was that the segment lifted from the Oldham recording didn’t sound a bit like the original Stones song, and the arranger who’d written the riff, David Whitaker, wasn’t even listed as a composer. As it stood, the credits for “Bitter Sweet Symphony” were shared between Verve vocalist Richard Ashcroft and Mick Jagger and Keith Richards. But the record couldn’t be released without the permission of Jagger and Richards’s publisher, ABKCO Music.
At a loss, Summers let his record company take a whack at it. Ken Berry, the head of EMI Records, came to New York and called on Klein. He played Klein the completed Verve album, Urban Hymns, which EMI’s Virgin label was betting would be a big hit. And “Bitter Sweet Symphony” was its obvious lead single. So Allen could appreciate how imperative it was that he grant a license.
“There’s no sampling of our music,” he said. “We just don’t believe in it.”
“Oh, @#$%&,” said the head of EMI Records.
Klein let a day or two pass before calling Berry. He realized EMI and the band were in a bind, he said, and he was willing to make an exception to his rule and grant a license—if Ashcroft sold ABKCO his rights as lyricist and the company became the sole publisher of “Bitter Sweet Symphony.” The bargain was made; Richard Ashcroft was paid a thousand dollars.
The deal was as unsparing as any in Klein’s career; he held all the cards, played them, and raked in the pot. When music photographer Mick Rock happened to call Klein that day to see how he was, it was obvious to him that Allen was enjoying himself. “I was very bad today,” he said.
The album did, in fact, become a hit, and the sampled riff in “Bitter Sweet Symphony” was a stadium-ready crowd pleaser that would prove extremely popular for use at sporting events. ABKCO actively exploited the composition, licensing it to be used in commercials around the world for various products, including Nike shoes and Opel automobiles.
When the band decided the song was being overexposed and overused, they declined to license the original recording for any more commercials. As the publisher, ABKCO instead commissioned its own recordings for commercial use. To date, “Bitter Sweet Symphony” remains one of ABKCO’s best-earning compositions.
For Klein, the old lion, it was the chance to linger over one last big kill. For Jagger and Richards, “Bitter Sweet Symphony” produced both a payday and a Grammy nomination for Song of the Year—pretty good, considering they had nothing to do with it and it didn’t sound anything like what they’d actually written."
As Allen’s constant companion and longtime employee, Iris Keitel didn’t have to guess how he would react to a particular proposition or problem. When Jazz Summers, the manager of the British group the Verve, called in early 1997 to say the band wanted to get publishing clearance for a sample, Iris handled the situation. She told Summers that someone from the record company had already phoned and tried to low-ball ABKCO with an offer of 15 percent. “I’ve told him to @#$%& off, Jazz,” she said. “We don’t like people stealing our music. I’ve spoken to Allen. We’re not going to agree to this.”
Indeed, Klein was ultraprotective. ABKCO was happy to support writers who wanted to collaborate with other artists, but he saw sampling as a dilution of a work’s viability and didn’t want to encourage people to use samples and then negotiate retroactively.
That was precisely what the Verve’s musicians were trying to do. In this case, the sample, used in a song entitled “Bitter Sweet Symphony,” was taken from an instrumental version of the Rolling Stones song “The Last Time” that had appeared on an album by the Andrew Loog Oldham Orchestra.
The Verve had cleared the rights to sample the recording from Decca Records, but they hadn’t thought about getting permission for the underlying composition until after the fact. The irony was that the segment lifted from the Oldham recording didn’t sound a bit like the original Stones song, and the arranger who’d written the riff, David Whitaker, wasn’t even listed as a composer. As it stood, the credits for “Bitter Sweet Symphony” were shared between Verve vocalist Richard Ashcroft and Mick Jagger and Keith Richards. But the record couldn’t be released without the permission of Jagger and Richards’s publisher, ABKCO Music.
At a loss, Summers let his record company take a whack at it. Ken Berry, the head of EMI Records, came to New York and called on Klein. He played Klein the completed Verve album, Urban Hymns, which EMI’s Virgin label was betting would be a big hit. And “Bitter Sweet Symphony” was its obvious lead single. So Allen could appreciate how imperative it was that he grant a license.
“There’s no sampling of our music,” he said. “We just don’t believe in it.”
“Oh, @#$%&,” said the head of EMI Records.
Klein let a day or two pass before calling Berry. He realized EMI and the band were in a bind, he said, and he was willing to make an exception to his rule and grant a license—if Ashcroft sold ABKCO his rights as lyricist and the company became the sole publisher of “Bitter Sweet Symphony.” The bargain was made; Richard Ashcroft was paid a thousand dollars.
The deal was as unsparing as any in Klein’s career; he held all the cards, played them, and raked in the pot. When music photographer Mick Rock happened to call Klein that day to see how he was, it was obvious to him that Allen was enjoying himself. “I was very bad today,” he said.
The album did, in fact, become a hit, and the sampled riff in “Bitter Sweet Symphony” was a stadium-ready crowd pleaser that would prove extremely popular for use at sporting events. ABKCO actively exploited the composition, licensing it to be used in commercials around the world for various products, including Nike shoes and Opel automobiles.
When the band decided the song was being overexposed and overused, they declined to license the original recording for any more commercials. As the publisher, ABKCO instead commissioned its own recordings for commercial use. To date, “Bitter Sweet Symphony” remains one of ABKCO’s best-earning compositions.
For Klein, the old lion, it was the chance to linger over one last big kill. For Jagger and Richards, “Bitter Sweet Symphony” produced both a payday and a Grammy nomination for Song of the Year—pretty good, considering they had nothing to do with it and it didn’t sound anything like what they’d actually written."
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
Mathijs
()
Date: January 3, 2020 18:39
Listening to MSG 27 show -HTW from Ya Ya is always noted as being from the 27th, but that’s clearly not the case. On this new audience tape at the last line of the first verse (going to the D chord) Keith makes a huge mistake, and during the first chorus Taylor goes high up the register in his lead lines, all missing from the Ya ya version.
Mathijs
Mathijs
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
dcba
()
Date: January 3, 2020 18:42
"By the nineties, Klein and the Stones had finally settled into a livable arrangement. Like a divorced couple who’ve learned to set aside animosity and lingering bitterness when the children need something, they negotiated partnerships and agreements.
In 2002, the band toured and marked their fortieth anniversary with a two-CD forty-song collection, Forty Licks. The first twenty numbers were culled from the ABKCO-controlled catalog, a deal that required real give-and-take to achieve. The Stones’ catalog was ABKCO’s lifeblood, and this compilation was just the kind of one-shot alternative to buying the original albums that Klein had always avoided. Yet its value to the band and to their tour—and to the Stones’ continuing viability—was obvious.
When Allen’s son, Jody, suggested a five-year payment formula that approximated what ABKCO expected to lose on catalog sales over that period, everyone found it far-thinking and reasonable. Everyone except Allen, that is, who seemed miffed to have the solution proposed by someone else, even if it was his son."
In 2002, the band toured and marked their fortieth anniversary with a two-CD forty-song collection, Forty Licks. The first twenty numbers were culled from the ABKCO-controlled catalog, a deal that required real give-and-take to achieve. The Stones’ catalog was ABKCO’s lifeblood, and this compilation was just the kind of one-shot alternative to buying the original albums that Klein had always avoided. Yet its value to the band and to their tour—and to the Stones’ continuing viability—was obvious.
When Allen’s son, Jody, suggested a five-year payment formula that approximated what ABKCO expected to lose on catalog sales over that period, everyone found it far-thinking and reasonable. Everyone except Allen, that is, who seemed miffed to have the solution proposed by someone else, even if it was his son."
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
jlowe
()
Date: January 3, 2020 19:19
Despite what Doxa says (earlier) I cannot imagine a scenario where The Stones will 'get their catalogue back' from ABCKO.
For the original Decca recordings it will be Public Domain time by 2040, unless the laws change in the meantime.By then, who knows what the structure of the music (record buying) industry will be?
For the original Decca recordings it will be Public Domain time by 2040, unless the laws change in the meantime.By then, who knows what the structure of the music (record buying) industry will be?
Re: New ABKCO copyright releases
Posted by:
Tornandfrayed
()
Date: January 3, 2020 19:51
Quote
S.T.PQuote
Tornandfrayed
...In Addition to the audio in the Gimme Shelter movie, a full Version of the multitrack Gimme Shelter has been circulating in excellent quality for a long time.
Question:
Is it multitracks to the songs in the movie that you are refearing to, or the song GS? -And if it's not the song: are these tracks all complete songs, ie. no cuts, and without other audio mixed in (like audience noise)?
I am referring to the performance of the song.
It was released along with two undoctored Ya-Ya´s tracks on the 1990 Bootleg CD "A Shot of Salvation". Street Fighting Man from 28-11 1st without the vocal overdubs and original vocal intact and Love In Vain from 26-11 with Mick´s pre-song chat included.
[www.discogs.com]
Gimme Shelter is different from the edited version which plays during the Gimme Shelter movie credits at the end. It is the full performance with Keith´s intro, all verses and both Keith guitar solos included as well as Mick and Keith pre-song talk ("One of you can chill one little girl..." "Come on fellas don´t riot").
It´s worth seeking out and the track gives a good indication of what a complete and professionally mixed multitrack Altamont sounds like.
The full edit is also on Youtube but in compressed audio and without pre-song talk:
[youtu.be]
Hope this helps...
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
5strings , ChrisL , cyclist , dishevelmentblues , eduardoacdc , frankotero , Mabru , philrock90 , StonedRambler , straycatuk , TooTight , TransmaniaconMC , zowie
Guests:
1846
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10