The link above is to an old video of JJF with Brian Jones...

A couple things:

1) It's obvious how much more forceful the song gets when Mick then Ronnie join the band but...

2) what was Keith & Brian's guitar-weaving connection? From the video it looks much more like Keith is the basic lead line (a-la MT or RW), and Brian is dropping the riffs on top of the lead...

Correct...or am I seeing things ? How would you describe the guitar relationship btw KR and Brian Jones ??

"It's just that demon life has got me in it's sway..."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-05-22 08:44 by BornOnTheBayou.

well ... since the JJF promo was mimed, and some say Brian wasn't in the studio when the backing tape was made,
i don't think it's the best basis for analyzing their playing styles/interaction.
i'd love it if we could get a good discussion going about the Keith & Brian Weave, though -
that "one guitarist with two guitars" effect, as Stu called their work together.


- october 7th 1963, by Gus Coral

Keith, be *well* - all the way, baby, all the way



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2006-05-22 09:58 by with sssoul.

I think the "weaving" between Brian and Keith was more in the early days of the Stones. I read that they would practice together alot when the Stones first formed when they were living with Mick in Edith Grove.
The best example of their weaving (I think) is the intro to It's All Over Now. Keith's melodic guitar with Brian's choppy style. Two distinct guitar sounds that fit together perfect.

In It's All Over Now it is Brian who's playing the melodic bits while Keith is getting this barking sound out of his guitar.

smile: i love it. that there's so much uncertainty over which of them played what is just what they were aiming at,
and just what Stu meant. it seems like about the only things people feel sure of is which of them played slide
and which was "the Chuck Berry artist". but go on, please! i love this topic.

Keith, be well - all the way, baby, all the way

Keith Richards 1989



ROCKMAN

Personally, I never considered Brian Jones to be a guitarist at all. He was a true multi-talented guy, who could find his way on a dozen of instruments. He wasn't excelling on one instrument in particular except for the harmonica, in which he was, and still is, one of the best players I have ever heard. But he was a musician whom could play a couple of chords on a guitar and hold down a dcent rythm, but he never was a real guitarist. You can see this on the first album already: on half the tracks he doesn't play guitar, but harmonica, tambourine or backing vocals.

Only on the very early recordings you hear the weaving between Keith and Brian. You can hear it for example on tracks like High-Heeled Sneakers, I Want to Be Loved and on some tracks of the first album (Honest I Do, Walking the Dog). But to me, I never heard much of this famous weaving between Keith and Brian, as they would normally have a quite clear dividing line between lead and rythm, with Brian holding down the Chuck Berry-style rythm guitar, or Brian would play slide and Keith would do rythm guitar. Later on, starting with Aftermath, Brian hardly plays guitar at all anymore, but he seems to be able to express himself much beter with all the other instruments he could play.

Mick Taylor and Keith never had the real kind of weaving (but if you listen to what Taylor does on live versions of Dancing With Mr. D for example it comes very close), and to me the real weaving was with Ron Wood, and they did it best on the 1978 tour. Check out live versions of When the Whip Comes Down: that's what I call real weaving, with both holding down the rythm guitar, playing little riffs and taking lead spots whenever they want to. Beast of Burden, Imagination and Shattered from Hampton 1981 is also a very good example.

Mathijs

I agree that the examples of brian/keith "weaving" are scanter than keith/ron. But I think there are some late-ish versions: how about "Flight 505"?

Mathijs Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Personally, I never considered Brian Jones to be a
> guitarist at all. But he was a musician whom could
> play a couple of chords on a guitar and hold down
> a dcent rythm, but he never was a real guitarist.

That's why the Stones sound became alot more powerful when "real" guitarists took over (Mick Taylor and Ron Wood)...

>
> Mick Taylor and Keith never had the real kind of
> weaving

But they had an "established connection"... Mick with high-speed lead lines that Keith dropped riff punctuations on... Almost a reversal of the relationship between Brian and Keith.


and to me the real weaving was
> with Ron Wood, and they did it best on the 1978
> tour.

Forty Licks was an incredible guitar tour also... Lisa didn't have to get her weave tightened because Ronnie & Keith were weaving every night

"It's just that demon life has got me in it's sway..."

The problem with Brian/Keith weave is the lack of any real documentary. All we can do is to believe the words of Stu, Keith and Charlie and just imagine how the endless sessions at Edith Grove sounded - or perhaps ask from the walls of Richmond Station hotel.

I don't really get the relevance of Mathijs' opinion that he does not consider Brian Jones as a "guitarist at all". What's that sort of labelling musicians to different sorts ('real guitarists' - those pure hearts who don't touch to any other intrument - and the rest, that is, 'non-guitarists' who happen to pick up guitar sometimes?) has to do with the historical fact that the basis for Rolling Stones as a guitar driving band came from the idea of "two guitars sounding as one" - the thing that Keith Richards has loved to repeat again and again. That he and Brian wanted to get rid of that "Shadows" thing of a distinguished lead and rhythm guitars.

In fact, from the base of official studio material from "Come On" to "Rough Justice" one can not really get sense for the meaning of 'weaving' - namely, lots of it has to do with technical constraints and possibilities in studio surroundings. There is, for example, much over-dubbing, isolated takes, etc. I suppose the 'real' weaving can only happen in live surroundings. Mathijs referred to 1978 and 1981 bootlegs - yeah, that's the kind of source if you want have some evidence of actual weaving. But that does not mean that it's the only place and time when the Stones guitarists weaved ever - even though the team of young and sloppy and unprofessional Brian and Keith wasn't much technically compared to the duo of later maestro Keef and his side-kick Ronnie, those young boys invented the bloody thing. They made a formula that turned out to be very successful with some marvellous results, even though there is not much audio evidence of the original form.

I have always thought that "Miss Amanda Jones" is a perfect example of late Jones/Richards weaving, but it could be the case that Keith plays all the guitar parts just by himself.

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-05-22 23:11 by Doxa.

Doxa Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have always thought that "Miss Amanda Jones" is
> a perfect example of late Jones/Richards weaving,
> but it could be the case that Keith plays all the
> guitar parts just by himself.

I think that is the case. Brilliant post otherwise.

the weave "weft" a long time ago with our band. However, I heard some of the best two-guitar weaving over the weekend between John Scofield and Larry Campbell playing in Phil's band....whoah! 4 hours of some hot geetar licks. Show was interrupted between sets by an acid-tripper who did a swan dive off the balcony. Diver and Divee were both wheeled out an hour later in "okay" condition (somehow).

phil... lesh? Didn't know that's what larry campbell was up to these days.

larry's been off-on with Phil since he left Bob over a year ago....also put out a very, very nice solo album

.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-05-22 23:33 by Lukester.

Hi Esperola,

It is Brian playing the "choppy" style guitar on It's All Over Now. In videos like the TAMI show, you can see what part each is playing. Kind of similar to his playing on Off The Hook and It's Alright, where Keith starts the song and then Brian kicks in with his buzz saw type intro.

there were no girls even remotely cute within 10 blocks of the Warfield, I can assure you....

What are you talking about, T&A?

cheater

ha ha

but, my comment remains accurate

Guitar weaving is one of the Stones signature, and you cand find it also in Taylor's early year. See for instance how they performed Satisfaction in Gimme Shelter movie. Taylor interacts wonderfully with Richards.

But there is also a bit of myth in that technique. I refer to some Richards interviews. Keith was reminding the good old time with Brian, and also a more recent area with Wood.

In short, Richards said that in this two cases the guitarists were so much interacting that, one night Keith could play this part, and the next gig, Wood would play instead this same part. I hardly believe that. Guitar weaving does not mean you can switch your part with your counterpart as if you were twins. It is a seducing idea, but not realistic. Because they are not clones, because each of them has a different sound, etc. Also because when the band has 50 dates in a tour and a show put in a good shape after some first "dress rehearsal" gigs, it is logic to no put the whole thing in jeopardy. I hardly believe the guitar players would experiment on stage a new thing every night, by switching or challenging each other role. But maybe 1978 was on that regard an exception.

The Joker Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> But there is also a bit of myth in that technique.
> I refer to some Richards interviews. Keith was
> reminding the good old time with Brian, and also a
> more recent area with Wood.
>
> In short, Richards said that in this two cases the
> guitarists were so much interacting that, one
> night Keith could play this part, and the next
> gig, Wood would play instead this same part. I
> hardly believe that. Guitar weaving does not mean
> you can switch your part with your counterpart as
> if you were twins. It is a seducing idea, but not
> realistic. Because they are not clones, because
> each of them has a different sound, etc. Also
> because when the band has 50 dates in a tour and a
> show put in a good shape after some first "dress
> rehearsal" gigs, it is logic to no put the whole
> thing in jeopardy. I hardly believe the guitar
> players would experiment on stage a new thing
> every night, by switching or challenging each
> other role. But maybe 1978 was on that regard an
> exception.

Exactly. There is myth in that technique surely - sometimes that even seems to be an excuse to play sloppy and less and even do that little with lazy attitude - not taking any stronger responsibilities of the rhythm or any other heavy duties. And moreover, I have made an observation that more they seem to talk about "Ancient Art of Weaving" (especially Ronnie thesedays) the less they seem to actually do it on stage. It's that "best Stones yet" bull.

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-05-23 00:08 by Doxa.

Doxa:

Your talkin' really "tough" today. I appreciate that! Takes the load off of me a bit....

Doxa Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The problem with Brian/Keith weave is the lack of
> any real documentary. All we can do is to believe
> the words of Stu, Keith and Charlie and just
> imagine how the endless sessions at Edith Grove
> sounded - or perhaps ask from the walls of
> Richmond Station hotel.

Well, We have about 8 full studio albums, 10 CD's worth of TV, BBC and live appearences, I guess that should be sufficient to an extent. And all these recording I have never heard Brian play something technically advanced. All he does was playing simple rythm, or simple slide in open G. Whenever technical skills were needed on guitar, Keith jumps in. Whever Keith's role was playing simple rythm, Brian would always revert to the harmonica in order to take the lead role, an never the guitar.
>
> I don't really get the relevance of Mathijs'
> opinion that he does not consider Brian Jones as a
> "guitarist at all". What's that sort of labelling
> musicians to different sorts ('real guitarists' -
> those pure hearts who don't touch to any other
> intrument - and the rest, that is,
> 'non-guitarists' who happen to pick up guitar
> sometimes?) has to do with the historical fact
> that the basis for Rolling Stones as a guitar
> driving band came from the idea of "two guitars
> sounding as one"

In my opinion Brian did not have the technical skill on guitar to be able to really weave or counteract with Richards. That's what I mean with Brian not being a "real guitarist". He was a real harmonica player: I can imagine Brian jamming as a harp player for hours with different musicians, taking solo's and what more. As a guitarist, I think he was constricted to laying a solid rythm down behind Keith. I also guess this is the reason that even on the first album Keith plays ALL guitars on half the songs: he simply was much more a "guitarist", much more technically skilled. Brian was more an Elmore James and Jimmy Reed kind of player: simple chording, preferably in open tuning. Keith was much more a Hubert Sumlin and Carl Perkins kind of player, technically much more advanced.


- the thing that Keith Richards
> has loved to repeat again and again. That he and
> Brian wanted to get rid of that "Shadows" thing of
> a distinguished lead and rhythm guitars.

Yes, but this is something different: Brian was a major factor in the direction the Stones went: playing Chicago blues with a London attitude. He didn't need to be a skilled guitarist to move the band into that direction, he was a much greater person that a guitarist alone.


>
> In fact, from the base of official studio material
> from "Come On" to "Rough Justice" one can not
> really get sense for the meaning of 'weaving' -
> namely, lots of it has to do with technical
> constraints and possibilities in studio
> surroundings. There is, for example, much
> over-dubbing, isolated takes, etc. I suppose the
> 'real' weaving can only happen in live
> surroundings.

No, I don't agrea. Listen to the Some Girls album. Most tracks are one-takers, with Wood and Richards bouncing off of eachother. Listen to Respectable: both are playing the same kind of Chuck Berry/Carl Perkinds riffs, bends and leads, and sometimes you hardly know who plays what. The same goes for Whip, Miss You, Imagination. The main reason for the weaving slowly dissapearing is de diminishing of Wood's role as a foil for Keith due to alcohol and drugs. Wood was a major band member in 1977, being in the studio 24 hours a day, but for Bigger Bang he was a session guitarist hired to do overdubs in three days.

Mathijs

Doxa Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
....> I don't really get the relevance of Mathijs'
> opinion that he does not consider Brian Jones as a
> "guitarist at all". What's that sort of labelling
> musicians to different sorts ('real guitarists' -
> those pure hearts who don't touch to any other
> intrument - and the rest, that is,
> 'non-guitarists' who happen to pick up guitar
> sometimes?) has to do with the historical fact
> that the basis for Rolling Stones as a guitar
> driving band came from the idea of "two guitars
> sounding as one" - the thing that Keith Richards
> has loved to repeat again and again. That he and
> Brian wanted to get rid of that "Shadows" thing of
> a distinguished lead and rhythm guitars....
>

hey doxa!

appreciated your informed and passionate post AND Mathijs' as well...tho they seem contradictory on one point on the surface...
by the time i had written this, you both had other cool posts on this thread...
two articulate, excellent and intelligent fans in a good exchange...

the stones made a whole lotta guitar music w/brian and to downplay it's significance is not a job i'm applying for...
am listening to route 66 live camden '64 as i write this...
brian playin' great rhythm and the two of them integrated really well.

but i also appreciate Marthijs' take on this...
adds something important to the stew ...

in that Brian's brilliance, a unique one...
is that he could make music out of almost any instrument...
and "heard" unique characteristic stuff, and just went about performing it,
whether he was a 'professional level' player on whatever instrument or not...
marimba in under my thumb, recorder in ruby tuesday, piano, sitar in whatever...
brian's various influences and proven performances were very major even aside from his guitar playin'...which i enjoy.
that aspect of brian's contribution might even be fairly called 'genuis'
he sure took that harp thing seriously too...

the whole 'weaving' thing is something of myth these past twenty plus years...for the most part...
ronnie NEVER starts those classic songs with keef's riffs...
and when keith drops out...lol...ronnie often is joking with the front rows, flicking cigs and dosen't seem to even notice, never mind cover...
'the ancient art of sloppy' lol both of 'em sometimes...
not the GOOD slop, on the edge of chaos that is so exhiliarating about the stones...
...they were ALWAYS a gloriusly rough and gritty outfit, even in their
most "technically proficient" or "tightest" periods...
no one is gonna confuse HTW,SF, exiles perios Stones with anything by the Average White Band..
as brilliant as all those players were.

was referring to the more germane 'sloppy' slop lol...
that doxa's most recent post on this thread alluded to as a cover for just not being on the ball with their game...

i've heard keith solos in some other key than what the band was playin' more than once...am i the only one?

not to say i don't love and appreciate ronnie, since jeff beck to the faces into the stones and solo stuff...(that wah-wah lead in msg hbo 1-03...on if u can't rock me is pretty wonderful!)...tho i like watching the small part of the screen that shows charlie playing all the way thru for the whole song...
can't get enough charlie...
i also find it cool when ronnie DOES just stop playing to mug with the crowd, light a cig, or better yet, flick a butt at mick behind his back...ronnie's playfulness and huge sweet presence is part of what's still so cool about 'em...

taylor standing stolid as a stone coaxing a universe of colors and power out of his gibson is also kinda cool...keith was like a hungry tiger feeding off charlie and i don't even know if he can, or wants to, play rhythm like that again...i mean he was going for it 2200000 %

no clowing about. not too many big smiles from mickt or keith...but oh what music....ferocious and gorgeous and dangerous and lovely and shake your shoulders stomp yer feet and go whoooooooooo.....

and i readily admit there's a ton of live stuff avaiable on boots from '78...that i haven't heard at all, and most trusted souls here think that a really amazing period for that 'weaving' thing between k&r...
and mathijs came up with those undeniable studio cut examples...

i also personally feel that keith and mickt were particularly in synch, interwoven in TANDEM, and that it brought out the best in both guitarists...
taylor only very seldom and rarely seems to get credit and respect for his incredibly chunky, much more than stalwart, inventive riffing and rhythm playing...he didn't just stand there and "noodle"...almost every lead i've ever heard out of him, tho impromptu, had structure and melody and dynamics that 'made sense' (to me) and spurred any particular song to higher heights.

we all love the human riff...but mickt had plenty of signature riff input on so many of the best loved classics...tho zero credit...maybe that's part of why he felt constrained in that band after 5 or so albums in 6 or so years.

he gets a lot of guff because he COULD play a soaring, fire breathing solo at any given moment...
keith was bitchy after taylor left...oh he's such a "soloist" and alla that...
breaking up is hard to do...down doobe doo down down comma comma...

but check how excited and vocally so, keith was to find mickt...
and to work with him, what came out of those sessions and tours...
after a long layoff from touring and the future of the live band VERY
uncertain...
the 3 years they didn't tour is the entire length of many band's careers, even good bands with really great stuff...
they've been honest about this in the past...they didn't even know if they could put it all out there again for sure, and what it would take, or sound like or how it would go over...
then classic album after classic album...brilliant.
they wouldn't be the same band with the same legacy without mickt,
and i'm not sure if anybody would be caring about 'weaving' or much else, without honkey tonk, brown sugar, live with me, love in vain, all of exiles, all of sticky fingers, all of ya-ya's...
and that took plenty of integrating solidly with keith...
(who, imo, played the vast majority of his best leads with taylor playing more than incredibly solid and inventive rhythm...)
purty darn 'woven' that...

beely boy, our generation's answer to Herman Melville . . .

i'm waiting for the movie of the above post....

can we get an abridged version?

nikkibong Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> beely boy, our generation's answer to Herman
> Melville . . .


ok that one was a little long...
call me ishmael...

however....
....there's a real shorty on your new 'drink 3 bottles of jack and slam Sheryl thread'



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-05-23 02:01 by Beelyboy.