Quote
Doxa

Quote
Taylor1
I don’t hear anything special with his bass playing on that song.If it wasn’t McCartney I doubt you would even notice it

I would claim that it would be pretty hard to NOT notice that bass solo no matter who came up with it...

One of those WTF moments on a Stones recording..

- Doxa

I think the point is YES you (obviously) hear the solo, but if you weren’t told beforehand, would you know the soloist?

Rod

-



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2024-03-18 09:58 by Doxa.

Quote
bitusa2012

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Taylor1
I don’t hear anything special with his bass playing on that song.If it wasn’t McCartney I doubt you would even notice it

I would claim that it would be pretty hard to NOT notice that bass solo no matter who came up with it...

One of those WTF moments on a Stones recording..

- Doxa

I think the point is YES you (obviously) hear the solo, but if you weren’t told beforehand, would you know the soloist?

Surely not (and if Mick had keep his mouth shut up about that one). But what does it matter really? It is a band effort and Macca is one of the band there. I don't have a particular interest hearing a distinguishable Paul McCartney there, but just something that fits to a Rolling Stones song. The same with Elton John. Both did a good contribution. It is good to know that it was them - people of that name doing such a job - nothing that special but apt. But that's all.

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-03-18 09:55 by Doxa.

Not the best song ever written...

...but it's a band letting rip, having some fun, playing some simple RnR ...

... it's not for thinking about

Maybe the idea above is to see no point having Macca there if what he does is not something 'special'. Since anyone could have done it. But I would see the case more like it is cool to have Macca, of all people, to do the job anyone could have done it..

But had it not been Macca, the bass player most probably would not have given such a distinguishable solo spot. So they wanted to emphasize Macca's presence there. And Mick made it obvious for anyone.

But If I may continue the thought experiment of not knowing beforehand... If I had been told there is one track in which Macca plays and one on which Bill plays. I think I had spotted Macca's track first, not for his particular style, but for that solo spot. Discovering Bill's track would have taken some time to be sure about I guess. I am sure that someone might have heard that from first listening, but I would not be that sure about myself, if I am honest.

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2024-03-18 10:52 by Doxa.

It's not really a solo. He just plays the riff really loud

Quote
DandelionPowderman
It's not really a solo. He just plays the riff really loud

Haha, true.. but a solo spot anyway...

- Doxa

It is not great bass playing.Not a knock on the greatness of McCartney.It’s the lameness of the song



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-03-18 12:21 by Taylor1.

'It's not great bass playing'.
I bow to higher knowledge, but it sounds fab to me and sounds like a great launch pad for Ronnie's blistering solo, which I love.

Quote
Taylor1
It is not great bass playing.Not a knock on the greatness of McCartney.It’s the lameness of the song

Fair enough. It is a case of personal taste if one finds it great or not, fitting to a song or not or whatever. It is the opinions we share here. To me it s probably not something I would describe that great an sich, but it generally fits there plus I find the fuzz part funny - a sort of Monty Python moment there. And I am probably the least Paul McCartney fan here... It very well could be that his bigger fans actually had wished him to contribute more, you know, do something more Macca or Beatles-like. But I'm very pleased with the decision and the results.

- Doxa

Wonder if anyone ever suggested to Bill that he take a bass solo ?

...I suspect his reaction may have been ...

Quote
Spud
Wonder if anyone ever suggested to Bill that he take a bass solo ?

...I suspect his reaction may have been ...

Well, "Miss You" sort of have one. But I recall him once complaining that when Keith plays the bass it is more upfront in the mix, but his stuff is always buried down there somewhere... I take the Keith songs to mean things like "Live With Me" and "Sympathy". So Bill's low profile as a bass player is not probably just his own artistic decision. Some early Stones recordings actually include a pretty wild and busy bass player compared to the economical, minimalist one we would later know.

So I wonder what Bill's reactions on hearing Macca's damn loud stuff there be like...

- Doxa



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2024-03-18 13:40 by Doxa.

Bill was the best whether low or high in the mix

Quote
Taylor1
Bill was the best whether low or high in the mix

Of course he was. However, I've never heard him play SFTD or Little T+A as good as Keith did.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Taylor1
It is not great bass playing.Not a knock on the greatness of McCartney.It’s the lameness of the song

Fair enough. It is a case of personal taste if one finds it great or not, fitting to a song or not or whatever. It is the opinions we share here. To me it s probably not something I would describe that great an sich, but it generally fits there plus I find the fuzz part funny - a sort of Monty Python moment there. And I am probably the least Paul McCartney fan here... It very well could be that his bigger fans actually had wished him to contribute more, you know, do something more Macca or Beatles-like. But I'm very pleased with the decision and the results.

- Doxa

The problem of this song for me is the sound. Its weird, feels very cheap, like an intro for a nickelodeon show or a commercial, the song is not bad but the production and somewhat the performance... btw do we have confirmation that Keith is here? I could bet it is just mick (doing keith) and ronnie...

Quote
dedospegajosos

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Taylor1
It is not great bass playing.Not a knock on the greatness of McCartney.It’s the lameness of the song

Fair enough. It is a case of personal taste if one finds it great or not, fitting to a song or not or whatever. It is the opinions we share here. To me it s probably not something I would describe that great an sich, but it generally fits there plus I find the fuzz part funny - a sort of Monty Python moment there. And I am probably the least Paul McCartney fan here... It very well could be that his bigger fans actually had wished him to contribute more, you know, do something more Macca or Beatles-like. But I'm very pleased with the decision and the results.

- Doxa

The problem of this song for me is the sound. Its weird, feels very cheap, like an intro for a nickelodeon show or a commercial, the song is not bad but the production and somewhat the performance... btw do we have confirmation that Keith is here? I could bet it is just mick (doing keith) and ronnie...

The very last licks (including the feedback) are Keith.

I agree about the rhythm guitar, though. Could very well be Mick.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Taylor1
Bill was the best whether low or high in the mix

Of course he was. However, I've never heard him play SFTD or Little T+A as good as Keith did.

He Keith and Charley were it

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Spud
Wonder if anyone ever suggested to Bill that he take a bass solo ?

...I suspect his reaction may have been ...

Well, "Miss You" sort of have one. But I recall him once complaining that when Keith plays the bass it is more upfront in the mix, but his stuff is always buried down there somewhere...

- Doxa

Bill playing the victim as usual!

Can't think of one example of Bill being buried in the mix.

C

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
dedospegajosos

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Taylor1
It is not great bass playing.Not a knock on the greatness of McCartney.It’s the lameness of the song

Fair enough. It is a case of personal taste if one finds it great or not, fitting to a song or not or whatever. It is the opinions we share here. To me it s probably not something I would describe that great an sich, but it generally fits there plus I find the fuzz part funny - a sort of Monty Python moment there. And I am probably the least Paul McCartney fan here... It very well could be that his bigger fans actually had wished him to contribute more, you know, do something more Macca or Beatles-like. But I'm very pleased with the decision and the results.

- Doxa

The problem of this song for me is the sound. Its weird, feels very cheap, like an intro for a nickelodeon show or a commercial, the song is not bad but the production and somewhat the performance... btw do we have confirmation that Keith is here? I could bet it is just mick (doing keith) and ronnie...

The very last licks (including the feedback) are Keith.

I agree about the rhythm guitar, though. Could very well be Mick.

Yeah, to me it sounds like Mick (or Keith mimicking Mick). Pretty straight-forward, more on the beat, busy strumming style Mick adopted at the time of SOME GIRLS. It lacks Keith's idiosyncratic style with his touch and incredible sense of timing. Probably all of Mick's playing derive from the example of Keith, the open tunings and all, but he never been that good pupil I suppose, never achieving that unique feel and even sublimity of the master, but sounding slightly, but decidedly different (for example, "Sway", "Stop Breaking Down" - even the intro of "Sad, Sad, Sad" that is supposed to be pretty Stones-by-numbers). This is not to say that Mick's playing is 'bad', since he is no any keithrichards, or even a proper guitarist by definition (his technique is not something to write home about). No, it's not: he has a good sense of rhythm and his playing usually works pretty well in a context of a song.

But I think what we hear on "Bite My Head Off" derives from SOME GIRLS period: Mick seemingly listened a lot of punk and somehow mixed his 'poor man's Keith-style' with it (although I recall Mick giving a lot credit on Ron Wood in helping him there). But Keith was horrified, and seemingly hated Mick's loud electric guitar at the time... Anyway, that simple and raw way of playing was an important part of the Stones sound and feel at the time, one of the driving forces of SOME GIRLS meeting the challenge of punk rock. Probably it all also kicked the arse of Keith, and thereby the punk indirectly electrified him, too... I mean, someone needed to hold Mick's horses, and modify his new ideas to apply better for the Stones... (but still the rhythm section of Bill & Charlie needed to work their asses off to simplify their natural groove to meet the demands of the over-energetic brandnew beat) In the three-guitar-attack' Mick's rhythm guitar allowed room for the real guitarists to develop their ancient art of weaving, etc.

Since then, it sounds like when Mick feels like having a hard rocking or a punk mood, he adopts that style again. So I think what "Bite My Head Off", like "Easy Sleazy" a while ago, artistically aims at is something like "Lies", "When the Whip Comes Down", "Where The Boys Go" and "Hold On Your Hat", and not that much at things like "Rip This Joint", "All Down The Line", or "Flip The Switch" that stem from a different mind set. The latter have more 'roll' element and, I think we could say, more 'Keithish' by constitution.

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2024-03-18 16:37 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
dedospegajosos

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Taylor1
It is not great bass playing.Not a knock on the greatness of McCartney.It’s the lameness of the song

Fair enough. It is a case of personal taste if one finds it great or not, fitting to a song or not or whatever. It is the opinions we share here. To me it s probably not something I would describe that great an sich, but it generally fits there plus I find the fuzz part funny - a sort of Monty Python moment there. And I am probably the least Paul McCartney fan here... It very well could be that his bigger fans actually had wished him to contribute more, you know, do something more Macca or Beatles-like. But I'm very pleased with the decision and the results.

- Doxa

The problem of this song for me is the sound. Its weird, feels very cheap, like an intro for a nickelodeon show or a commercial, the song is not bad but the production and somewhat the performance... btw do we have confirmation that Keith is here? I could bet it is just mick (doing keith) and ronnie...

The very last licks (including the feedback) are Keith.

I agree about the rhythm guitar, though. Could very well be Mick.

Yeah, to me it sounds like Mick (or Keith mimicking Mick). Pretty straight-forward, more on the beat, busy strumming style Mick adopted at the time of SOME GIRLS. It lacks Keith's idiosyncratic style with his touch and incredible sense of timing. Probably all of Mick's playing derive from the example of Keith, the open tunings and all, but he never been that good pupil I suppose, never achieving that unique feel and even sublimity of the master, but sounding slightly, but decidedly different (for example, "Sway", "Stop Breaking Down" - even the intro of "Sad, Sad, Sad" that is supposed to be pretty Stones-by-numbers). This is not to say that Mick's playing is 'bad', since he is no any keithrichards, or even a proper guitarist by definition (his technique is not something to write home about). No, it's not: he has a good sense of rhythm and his playing usually works pretty well in a context of a song.

But I think what we hear on "Bite My Head Off" derives from SOME GIRLS period: Mick seemingly listened a lot of punk and somehow mixed his 'poor man's Keith-style' with it (although I recall Mick giving a lot credit on Ron Wood in helping him there). But Keith was horrified, and seemingly hated Mick's loud electric guitar at the time... Anyway, that simple and raw way of playing was an important part of the Stones sound and feel at the time, one of the driving forces of SOME GIRLS meeting the challenge of punk rock. Probably it all also kicked the arse of Keith, and thereby the punk indirectly electrified him, too... I mean, someone needed to hold Mick's horses, and modify his new ideas to apply better for the Stones... (but still the rhythm section of Bill & Charlie needed to work their asses off to simplify their natural groove to meet the demands of the over-energetic brandnew beat) In the three-guitar-attack' Mick's rhythm guitar allowed room for the real guitarists to develop their ancient art of weaving, etc.

Since then, it sounds like when Mick feels like having a hard rocking or a punk mood, he adopts that style again. So I think what "Bite My Head Off", like "Easy Sleazy" a while ago, artistically aims at is something like "Lies", "When the Whip Comes Down", "Where The Boys Go" and "Hold On Your Hat", and not that much at things like "Rip This Joint", "All Down The Line", or "Flip The Switch" that stem from a different mind set. The latter have more 'roll' element and, I think we could say, more 'Keithish' by constitution.

- Doxa

That´s spot on Doxa...great analysis

And another thing, Keith played BMHO COMPLETELY different in the Racket show to what we hear on the studio version, which makes the whole thing more suspicious...and then they wiped him out for the live release, maybe they wiped him out on the album version too..



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-03-18 16:58 by dedospegajosos.

Quote
dedospegajosos

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
dedospegajosos

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Taylor1
It is not great bass playing.Not a knock on the greatness of McCartney.It’s the lameness of the song

Fair enough. It is a case of personal taste if one finds it great or not, fitting to a song or not or whatever. It is the opinions we share here. To me it s probably not something I would describe that great an sich, but it generally fits there plus I find the fuzz part funny - a sort of Monty Python moment there. And I am probably the least Paul McCartney fan here... It very well could be that his bigger fans actually had wished him to contribute more, you know, do something more Macca or Beatles-like. But I'm very pleased with the decision and the results.

- Doxa

The problem of this song for me is the sound. Its weird, feels very cheap, like an intro for a nickelodeon show or a commercial, the song is not bad but the production and somewhat the performance... btw do we have confirmation that Keith is here? I could bet it is just mick (doing keith) and ronnie...

The very last licks (including the feedback) are Keith.

I agree about the rhythm guitar, though. Could very well be Mick.

Yeah, to me it sounds like Mick (or Keith mimicking Mick). Pretty straight-forward, more on the beat, busy strumming style Mick adopted at the time of SOME GIRLS. It lacks Keith's idiosyncratic style with his touch and incredible sense of timing. Probably all of Mick's playing derive from the example of Keith, the open tunings and all, but he never been that good pupil I suppose, never achieving that unique feel and even sublimity of the master, but sounding slightly, but decidedly different (for example, "Sway", "Stop Breaking Down" - even the intro of "Sad, Sad, Sad" that is supposed to be pretty Stones-by-numbers). This is not to say that Mick's playing is 'bad', since he is no any keithrichards, or even a proper guitarist by definition (his technique is not something to write home about). No, it's not: he has a good sense of rhythm and his playing usually works pretty well in a context of a song.

But I think what we hear on "Bite My Head Off" derives from SOME GIRLS period: Mick seemingly listened a lot of punk and somehow mixed his 'poor man's Keith-style' with it (although I recall Mick giving a lot credit on Ron Wood in helping him there). But Keith was horrified, and seemingly hated Mick's loud electric guitar at the time... Anyway, that simple and raw way of playing was an important part of the Stones sound and feel at the time, one of the driving forces of SOME GIRLS meeting the challenge of punk rock. Probably it all also kicked the arse of Keith, and thereby the punk indirectly electrified him, too... I mean, someone needed to hold Mick's horses, and modify his new ideas to apply better for the Stones... (but still the rhythm section of Bill & Charlie needed to work their asses off to simplify their natural groove to meet the demands of the over-energetic brandnew beat) In the three-guitar-attack' Mick's rhythm guitar allowed room for the real guitarists to develop their ancient art of weaving, etc.

Since then, it sounds like when Mick feels like having a hard rocking or a punk mood, he adopts that style again. So I think what "Bite My Head Off", like "Easy Sleazy" a while ago, artistically aims at is something like "Lies", "When the Whip Comes Down", "Where The Boys Go" and "Hold On Your Hat", and not that much at things like "Rip This Joint", "All Down The Line", or "Flip The Switch" that stem from a different mind set. The latter have more 'roll' element and, I think we could say, more 'Keithish' by constitution.

- Doxa

That´s spot on Doxa...great analysis

And another thing, Keith played BMHO COMPLETELY different in the Racket show to what we hear on the studio version, which makes the whole thing more suspicious...and then they wiped him out for the live release, maybe they wiped him out on the album version too..

He played licks, like on the album. Different (and inferior). And they added the studio rhythm guitar track (Mick's?) on the live album.

................why does everyone have to over analyize this album?. More importantly, stating that studio overdubs were used, for this or any other album??. I think they put in hard work, knowing in the back of their minds, they may not be putting out many more...so. "let's make it good". As I stated before, the bigger crime is not bringing Bill or MT along for the tour!

..........IMO...........The boot "Live'r than you'll ever be"" was and still is considered one of the best, and more likely "THE BEST" boot of all time, given the circumstances , how it was recorded, and the fact it was recognized, and actually awarded a GOLD DISC!!!!......and..........ooooohhhh...........I almost forgot............NO OVERDUBS!!!!! >><

<why does everyone have to over analyize this album?>

When we're discussing the live album, it's kinda relevant if they use tracks from the studio album to touch it up, no?

Quote
DandelionPowderman


When we're discussing the live album, it's kinda relevant if they use tracks from the studio album to touch it up, no?

It certainly is relevant.

But, that said, I think some folks get too hung up about it.

If something's not right in a live performance, it's gone in that instant...

...but you don't necessarily want to hear it over and over again on the record.

Some Girls so called “punk” songs are way better than Bite My Head Off or Sleezy.

Overdubbing with a new performance is one thing, copying and pasting from the studio version is a new level of mediocrity ...and also stupidity



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-03-19 16:40 by dedospegajosos.

Quote
dedospegajosos
Overdubbing with a new performance is one thing, copying and pasting from the studio version is a new level of mediocrity ...and also stupidity

It certainly is not very "punk". If that word has any meaning at all, it must be the opposite of something like overdubbing a studio version onto a live recording.

Quote
matxil

Quote
dedospegajosos
Overdubbing with a new performance is one thing, copying and pasting from the studio version is a new level of mediocrity ...and also stupidity

It certainly is not very "punk". If that word has any meaning at all, it must be the opposite of something like overdubbing a studio version onto a live recording.

It starts to seriously sound that "Fortune Teller" and "I've Been Loving You For Too Long" on GOT LIVE IF YOU WANT IT! wasn't that punk thing to do...

Although it was so shameless that it almost had a punk attitude...

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2024-03-19 21:51 by Doxa.

Quote
dedospegajosos
Overdubbing with a new performance is one thing, copying and pasting from the studio version is a new level of mediocrity ...and also stupidity

Hmm..I get your point and feel your sentiment, but what does it really matter from where the over-dub derives from? That of Jagger hammering the part one to one again, or using the already recorded 'original'? A studio over-dub and 'non-authentic' all the same.

More that of stupidity I would call it more like laziness... Or pragmatic reasoning.

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-03-19 22:08 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
dedospegajosos
Overdubbing with a new performance is one thing, copying and pasting from the studio version is a new level of mediocrity ...and also stupidity

Hmm..I get your point and feel your sentiment, but what does it really matter from where the over-dub derives from? That of Jagger hammering the part one to one again, or using the already recorded 'original'? A studio over-dub and 'non-authentic' all the same.

More that of stupidity I would call it more like laziness... Or pragmatic reasoning.

- Doxa

Imagine Get yer ya yas out! overdubbed with the original studio tracks instead of the re-recorded newly performed parts...