Keith has more of the creative spark and more of an understanding of how a 'record' (his word for it) is created. All those hours learning and taking apart other peoples' records. You saw a little bit of that in Charlie is My Darling. And he likes to downplay his work ethic and say the songs just come to him -- well, sure, after long hours or working.
Mick was a great editor and brought a lot of that out of Keith, and shaped it. Mick was a good songwriter and got better.
By the late '70s, Mick didn't need Keith to write songs and he didn't want to spend long hours with him, either.
I also think that Keith's muse took him in directions that Mick couldn't follow. Examples: Keith wanted Start Me Up to be a reggae song, but Mick took the rock version. Keith wrote songs like 'All About You, Thief in the Night, How Can I stop' that were unsuitable for the Stones brand.
I think we lost a lot of good music because they stayed in an unhappy marriage. On the other hand, Keith might not have survived without the structure of the Stones.
Really I think Keith is the most unappreciated songwriting talent of the rock age, despite all the evidence being right there on the records.

RETIRED DOG.

You are taking Keith out of context, when he says ''Mick writes lots i write little'' that was frustration, he was going into the studio to make a Stones album and he wants to make it with Mick, he doesn't want them both coming in with their own work, he's offering up his 3 killer riffs and saying to Mick, come on let's make a start right here in the Studio, work on these riffs and take it from there, he doesn't want a Stones album consisting of Jagger Demo's and Keith's riffs. He wants a COLLABORATION.

That's where the good stuff comes but Mick doesn't want to go back to the days when he would sit for hours on end making something happen from Keith's offerings, hence we get shit albums.
I tell you something though, there is nothing quick about Mick taking the short cut is there, how many years has it taken for something to come from those demos, it's laughable.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-05-01 21:27 by keithsman.

Quote
keithsman
RETIRED DOG.

You are taking Keith out of context, when he says ''Mick writes lots i write little'' that was frustration, he was going into the studio to make a Stones album and he wants to make it with Mick, he doesn't want them both coming in with their own work, he's offering up his 3 killer riffs and saying to Mick, come on let's make a start right here in the Studio, work on these riffs and take it from there, he doesn't want a Stones album consisting of Jagger Demo's and Keith's riffs. He wants a COLLABORATION.

That's where the good stuff comes but Mick doesn't want to go back to the days when he would sit for hours on end making something happen from Keith's offerings, hence we get shit albums.
I tell you something though, there is nothing quick about Mick taking the short cut is there, how many years has it taken for something to come from those demos, it's laughable.

That's where the good stuff came back in the day, but who tells you that today it would work if they try? If ABB is any indication where the two supposedly met to write and demo songs I must say that this was imo not a return to "classic" form by any means or at least any better than BTB, where they obviously worked in almost total separation, like two solo albums thrown together to make one Stones album.

Mick would be a fool to throw away a winning formula, and as I'm pretty sure that he's not, there must be other reasons why he obviously believes the outcome would not be any better compared to the way they actually work now.

And who says that Ronnie and in particular Charlie would be at hand for such time-consuming efforts? Plus, people like Bill Wyman, Nicky Hopkins and others are also not anymore at hand whose influence cannot be underestimated.

The fact that they don't live around the corner anymore also does not help. Back in their heyday, the could ring each other in the middle of the night - "hey, I've got this great guitar riff, just come over and we'll nail the thing!"...

I also think that your continued claim that Mick is not willing to cooperate with Keith is far off the mark because by all accounts they both state that there's still a lot of cooperation between the two - maybe just not the way how you want them to create Stones music.

Quote
keithsman

Quote
Gazza

Quote
keithsman
Before the Stones made solo records I got the impression 70 % of the lyrics were Mick's and 70% of the music was Keith's.
After listening to their solo albums i have the same impression but also feel certain that some of the more meaningful material like Gimme Shelter is Keith's, and that the sound of the Stones is Keith's.

Now in resent decades that dynamic and ratio has changed, I'd say 70% of the music and lyrics are down to Mick.

I would also point out that Mick's best spell of writing in the early 70s had a lot of help from Mick Taylor who gets virtually no songwriting credits, but a lot of great songs during that period have Taylor all over them.

70% would be very conservative.

I would doubt that there are more than 3-4 songs on ABB that are primarily written by Keith.

1 of the 4 Licks songs and 1 of the 2 new songs on Grr are Keith compositions.

The rewritten lyrics for the bonus tracks on the reissues of Exile and Some Girls seem to be Mick-written.

And going by the interviews theyve done for the album they're currently making, its going to follow a similar pattern. I cant recall the exact quote but Keith mentioned something about Mick coming in with about 20-30 new songs or ideas for songs to the 4-5 that he had.

To be honest do you think Mick would have it any other way, he's well known to be a control freak
( the commander these last few decades, do you think if Keith said I've got 10 tracks supiorior to yours and they are going in the album Mick would agree, no Keith knows that would be a waste of effort on his part. Obviously Keith can make music when he wants too, Crosseyed Heart shows Keith has nothing to prove in that department,
It is what it is these days, Mick Jagger solo Stones albums with Keith playing on them and being allowed or permitted about a third of the album if he's lucky.
It's basically Mick's way or the highway and Keith knows it. There is no winning with someone like that and as a result we get substandard product because it's not a collaboration.
Keith is either in denial about taking a back seat and letting Mick pull the shots or he has become incredibly lazy or both. Shame on him.

As for Mick coming in with 40 demos or songs and Keith having three, what does that tell you, all these years later no album, the demos must have been wanting as Stones material, and maybe finally Keith put his foot down and rejected them, otherwise we would have had a Stones album years ago or a Mick solo album. I'd say Mick's cornered himself.

OK we will finally get this Stones album but I'd rather have had a couple solo album's from Mick, Keith and Ronnie in the time it's taken to complete, and we know what it's going to consist of, stuff like the new single, it's OK but it's not worth waiting 15 years for.

I genuinely think that Keith has taken more of a back seat in the band since they regrouped in 1989. Maybe it was a condition of Mick agreeing to work with him again, I dont know but I suspect it probably was. The direction of the band as a touring unit for the next couple of decades was more or less driven by Jagger and Cohl and the fact that Chuck Leavell is the band's onstage 'musical director' speaks volumes regarding Keith's abdication of that role. Add to that Keith's own admission that he doesnt push song ideas to Mick regarding the 16-17 or so songs that he's going to sing every night (Leavell does this).

I also believe this has been further accentuated since the 50th anniversary shows and beyond - after the fallout following Keith's autobiography, it seems that there were a few changes required to get Mick onboard. Two sober guitarists, no Blondie Chaplin for Keith to fall back on, etc.

Regarding the actual recorded songs, I dont think its a case of 'Mick's way or the highway'. They're equal partners in that regard. It's worth remembering that only three years ago, Mick put out two songs as a standalone solo single because Keith had vetoed them for use by the Stones (he's the only band member who doesnt play on them).

I think it's simply that the creative well has run dry for the most part. It's not a criticism of Keith, it's simply a natural thing to happen for a songwriter at some stage. Pretty much every songwriter from Dylan down has had that problem from time to time. Not everyone regains the inspiration. Its perfectly understandable that age and lifestyle have taken their toll on his creative juices. Getting anything at all from him at 76 is a bonus. It's not as if he has anything left to prove nor does he owe us another masterpiece.

Quote
retired_dog

The fact that they don't live around the corner anymore also does not help. Back in their heyday, the could ring each other in the middle of the night - "hey, I've got this great guitar riff, just come over and we'll nail the thing!"...

This. You can basically trace the start of the demise of their creative partnership to when they ceased to live on the same street as each other (ie, Cheyne Walk). Pretty hard to sustain it when you dont even live on the same continent.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-05-01 23:03 by Gazza.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
keithsman

Quote
Gazza

Quote
keithsman
Before the Stones made solo records I got the impression 70 % of the lyrics were Mick's and 70% of the music was Keith's.
After listening to their solo albums i have the same impression but also feel certain that some of the more meaningful material like Gimme Shelter is Keith's, and that the sound of the Stones is Keith's.

Now in resent decades that dynamic and ratio has changed, I'd say 70% of the music and lyrics are down to Mick.

I would also point out that Mick's best spell of writing in the early 70s had a lot of help from Mick Taylor who gets virtually no songwriting credits, but a lot of great songs during that period have Taylor all over them.

70% would be very conservative.

I would doubt that there are more than 3-4 songs on ABB that are primarily written by Keith.

1 of the 4 Licks songs and 1 of the 2 new songs on Grr are Keith compositions.

The rewritten lyrics for the bonus tracks on the reissues of Exile and Some Girls seem to be Mick-written.

And going by the interviews theyve done for the album they're currently making, its going to follow a similar pattern. I cant recall the exact quote but Keith mentioned something about Mick coming in with about 20-30 new songs or ideas for songs to the 4-5 that he had.

To be honest do you think Mick would have it any other way, he's well known to be a control freak
( the commander these last few decades, do you think if Keith said I've got 10 tracks supiorior to yours and they are going in the album Mick would agree, no Keith knows that would be a waste of effort on his part. Obviously Keith can make music when he wants too, Crosseyed Heart shows Keith has nothing to prove in that department,
It is what it is these days, Mick Jagger solo Stones albums with Keith playing on them and being allowed or permitted about a third of the album if he's lucky.
It's basically Mick's way or the highway and Keith knows it. There is no winning with someone like that and as a result we get substandard product because it's not a collaboration.
Keith is either in denial about taking a back seat and letting Mick pull the shots or he has become incredibly lazy or both. Shame on him.

As for Mick coming in with 40 demos or songs and Keith having three, what does that tell you, all these years later no album, the demos must have been wanting as Stones material, and maybe finally Keith put his foot down and rejected them, otherwise we would have had a Stones album years ago or a Mick solo album. I'd say Mick's cornered himself.

OK we will finally get this Stones album but I'd rather have had a couple solo album's from Mick, Keith and Ronnie in the time it's taken to complete, and we know what it's going to consist of, stuff like the new single, it's OK but it's not worth waiting 15 years for.

I genuinely think that Keith has taken more of a back seat in the band since they regrouped in 1989. Maybe it was a condition of Mick agreeing to work with him again, I dont know but I suspect it probably was. The direction of the band as a touring unit for the next couple of decades was more or less driven by Jagger and Cohl and the fact that Chuck Leavell is the band's onstage 'musical director' speaks volumes regarding Keith's abdication of that role. Add to that Keith's own admission that he doesnt push song ideas to Mick regarding the 16-17 or so songs that he's going to sing every night (Leavell does this).

I also believe this has been further accentuated since the 50th anniversary shows and beyond - after the fallout following Keith's autobiography, it seems that there were a few changes required to get Mick onboard. Two sober guitarists, no Blondie Chaplin for Keith to fall back on, etc.

Regarding the actual recorded songs, I dont think its a case of 'Mick's way or the highway'. They're equal partners in that regard. It's worth remembering that only three years ago, Mick put out two songs as a standalone solo single because Keith had vetoed them for use by the Stones (he's the only band member who doesnt play on them).

I think it's simply that the creative well has run dry for the most part. It's not a criticism of Keith, it's simply a natural thing to happen for a songwriter at some stage. Pretty much every songwriter from Dylan down has had that problem from time to time. Not everyone regains the inspiration. Its perfectly understandable that age and lifestyle have taken their toll on his creative juices. Getting anything at all from him at 76 is a bonus. It's not as if he has anything left to prove nor does he owe us another masterpiece.

This sound plausible to me.......

__________________________

I thought they lived on Stella Street...
[www.youtube.com]

I think Keith likes to tour, likes to play his role, likes the money and the status. Probably doesn't care about much of the rest of it.
I don't necessarily know if that means Mick makes all the decisions and Keith is just a session man. Mick needs Keith around for it to be the Rolling Stones; I'm sure Keith uses that leverage when he can.

I'm sure Keith wrote most of the songs in the 60's and 70's. But how detailed is a song written, especially by Keith who often points out that he brings more of skeletons of songs to the studio?

I have always wondered if it's even possible for another person to have written what Mick sings on the finished song.
The singing often goes outside the song itself if you know what I mean, and often more prominent.

Quote
Thommie
I'm sure Keith wrote most of the songs in the 60's and 70's. But how detailed is a song written, especially by Keith who often points out that he brings more of skeletons of songs to the studio?

I have always wondered if it's even possible for another person to have written what Mick sings on the finished song.
The singing often goes outside the song itself if you know what I mean, and often more prominent.

If you listen to the version with Mick on vocals, You Got The Silver is such a song.

Purely agree.
Mick is the engine now.
Wish he writes again rock song for the band like the great Mother of a man (Wandering spirit album).

Quote
Gazza

I think it's simply that the creative well has run dry for the most part. It's not a criticism of Keith, it's simply a natural thing to happen for a songwriter at some stage. Pretty much every songwriter from Dylan down has had that problem from time to time. Not everyone regains the inspiration. Its perfectly understandable that age and lifestyle have taken their toll on his creative juices. Getting anything at all from him at 76 is a bonus. It's not as if he has anything left to prove nor does he owe us another masterpiece.

***
I'm just a Bad Boy Boogie



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-05-02 14:42 by powerage78.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Thommie
I'm sure Keith wrote most of the songs in the 60's and 70's. But how detailed is a song written, especially by Keith who often points out that he brings more of skeletons of songs to the studio?

I have always wondered if it's even possible for another person to have written what Mick sings on the finished song.
The singing often goes outside the song itself if you know what I mean, and often more prominent.

If you listen to the version with Mick on vocals, You Got The Silver is such a song.

Yes, and what do we know about Satisfaction, Get Off Of My Cloud, We Love You, Rocks Off, Paint It Black, Loving Cup to name a few?
Without knowing how the songs were written it’s hard to think another one but Mick could come up with the singing ”melody”.