I remember feeling irritated by the 'programmed' parts of "Undercover" in '89, which was pretty hot nevertheless, but the canned aspects of that tour sometimes kept the band too restrained and Charlie relatively metronomic...There may be some Chuck-controlled tape on this track, as with the percussion on SFTD, but the band is shaking up parts and Mick - who does have a distinctive guitar style on records - is loud & clear when he bothers to play, on RFD & especially "Back Of My Hand" unlike some past tours where his guitar sometimes seems more like a prop (again, '89 on 'Rock and a Hard Place' & others on which he was barely audible).

john r Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I remember feeling irritated by the 'programmed'
> parts of "Undercover" in '89, which was pretty hot
> nevertheless, but the canned aspects of that tour
> sometimes kept the band too restrained and Charlie
> relatively metronomic...There may be some
> Chuck-controlled tape on this track, as with the
> percussion on SFTD, but the band is shaking up
> parts and Mick - who does have a distinctive
> guitar style on records - is loud & clear when he
> bothers to play, on RFD & especially "Back Of My
> Hand" unlike some past tours where his guitar
> sometimes seems more like a prop (again, '89 on
> 'Rock and a Hard Place' & others on which he was
> barely audible).


Well, it's because on previous tours guitar for Mick was more like a toy to dance with while on Bigger Bang he actually plays it (and of course dance with it, what looks great, I know he must feel sexy with it). Back Of My Hand was serious change in Mick's guitar playing during the show. I would love to hear them doing it again. It really worked fine and Mick was doing great job. When you watch Boston video you can see this beautiful scene with a little bit nervous Mick with guitar and Keith just right behind him, Ronnie on left - supporting Mick in "I back you up in case" kind of way - this is indeed another beautiful moment in Rolling Stones - their interaction and co-operation. Back Of My Hand worked really great and I there was no reason to drop it from the setlist, I wonder what the reason was.

But anyway - you're right - now you can hear Mick adding this 'whatcha whatcha' sounds in RFD, nicely feeling the background of the song, while Keith & Ronnie are waving and exchanging licks -> I love the way they do it just right after Darryl's solo -> I called it "question & answer" guitar interplay - it's beautiful.

But also you can hear Mick on Miss You. On Licks Tour although I could hear Mick adding some licks in Don't Stop, but he wasn't that much audible. I remember hearing his guitar so clearly in Amsterdam 2003.

Anyway - go Mick, go - he obviously improved his guitar skills. But after all he had the greatest teachers around him

I think that's the answer--it's a sampled guitar triggered by chuck on the keyboard, rather than programmed in a way where they would have to stay on time like a metronome. One question might be whether mick at least plays it at the top of the song, then chuck takes over with the sample once they get going.

I would think it couldn't be ron playing the lick on the studio version, since he wasn't there for the basic tracking, and it's a central part of the song. Though they could have overdubbed him over mick or whoever's original go at it.

<it's a sampled guitar triggered by chuck on the keyboard>

That was what I meant to say

Before the Circus returns to the UK I think it's time to correct my previous post in this one year old thread

cc is right. It's Chuck who triggers a sample and Mick is very concentrated to make sure they both start in sync. Still Mick is pretending the sound is coming out of his guitar - kind of.

How much pre-recorded stuff is acceptable amongst "classical” Rock ‘n’ Roll musicians before they are accused of playing in playback mode like in the (wrong) SPIEGEL article some years ago. The Stones admit using the loop in Sympathy but I’ve never read of any other pre-recorded parts.

I'm pretty confident we're going to here this song again in one of the O2 shows.

I have positively heard the sound live many times and seen the hands and fingers of Mick, Keith, Ronnie and Blondie NOT touching the guitar strings when they were suppposed to play this riff on "Rain Fall Down". May be there are guitars on stage that are tuned for playing that riff but it is for sure sampled and coming from that sample for parts of the song. If it rain heavily at Slane then may be they add it for tonight, or may be they do it in London. Right now Rain Fall Down in Ireland, like it has done in this area most of the summer.

Bjornulf

So we've got pre-recorded stuff on Sympathy For The Devil and also Rain Fall Down.
U2 does it on a regular basis and they always put on a good show.
Now we need to credit Chuck for not only the rare tunes on the setlists but also the ringing guitar on Rain Fall Down.
I just love Chuckie!!!

PiotrRSpl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> that's what I thought, but it must be quite hard
> to coordinate and they always get it right. The
> other mystery about this song is WHY THE HELL it
> was dropped from the setlist? On European tour
> they only played it in Vienna and I was lucky to
> hear it. There is totally no reason not to play
> this song - it's their single, it was played on
> radio quite a lot in Europe, people loves the
> song, it has mdoern feeling to it, you can dance
> to it and most definately it works live in 100%!
> Guitar interplay is priceless on it! Bring it back
> for UK and Bergen and Horsens !


they played RFD 3 times in Europe last year..Vienna ,Glasgow,London 2.

I thought it is quite obvious the ringing guitar is a sample. I mean, they're not hiding it in any way don't they. Parts of the percussion are samples as well. By the way, great song. On the Biggest Bang DVD the only worthwhile songs are the new ones and the covers. I don't understand they dropped all the new ones from the set.

Mathijs

this (along with back of my hand) could have been THE live number of the tour. it was miles better live than Oh No Not Rough Jvstice Again. yeah, mick faked playing the riff, but c'mon, even keith fakes it a bit sometimes too . . .



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-08-18 15:16 by nikki bong.

I get a kick out of how most folks are so resistent to giving Chuck any credit for anything but I know one thing, if Chuck were to leave, you'd see exactly what he added to the overall sound.

ladies and gentleman, welcome,,, chuck leavell and his rolling stones

I'm not a chuck-basher, but triggering a sample on a keyboard is not exactly a feather in one's musical cap. it's just hitting one key.

Trickery!

mickschix Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I get a kick out of how most folks are so
> resistent to giving Chuck any credit for anything
> but I know one thing, if Chuck were to leave,
> you'd see exactly what he added to the overall
> sound.

Without Chuck there would be no live Rolling Stones, that's absolutely clear. But I just do not like what he ads to the sound. I don't like his sound, and he just isn't a boogie or rock and roll player.

Mathijs

well, if that's Chuck than why the hell this ringing tone is not exacly the same each time? Of course he could make different samples of it on his keyboard, for sure, but what sense would it make?

Ringing tone is exacly the same as Keith's guitar tone. And to play it you don't need to make a big move with your hand. And I can see him playing something when we can hear ringing tone, so what else that would be ?

Mathijs Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> On the
> Biggest Bang DVD the only worthwhile songs are the
> new ones and the covers.


You are joking right? I mean what about GOMC and SOC? How about the killer version of JJF from Rio? What about Sway from Austin? I could go on and on. And might I add YGMR from Austin. And Brown Sugar from Austin as well. Sterling version.

JumpingKentFlash

Well, I checked the BB DVD, and there's no Chuck involved at all. Jagger starts the intro, and Keith follows. Both Jagger and Richards have the Fulltone Tape Delay full on, so it sounds like there's more guitars involved. But there's no samples or trickery here.

Mathijs

Mathijs Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, I checked the BB DVD, and there's no Chuck
> involved at all. Jagger starts the intro, and
> Keith follows. Both Jagger and Richards have the
> Fulltone Tape Delay full on, so it sounds like
> there's more guitars involved. But there's no
> samples or trickery here.
>
> Mathijs


But that could be overdubs right? I mean: It's not like this DVD isn't overdubbed. We all know that.

JumpingKentFlash

JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mathijs Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > On the
> > Biggest Bang DVD the only worthwhile songs are
> the
> > new ones and the covers.
>
>
> You are joking right? I mean what about GOMC and
> SOC? How about the killer version of JJF from Rio?
> What about Sway from Austin? I could go on and on.
> And might I add YGMR from Austin. And Brown Sugar
> from Austin as well. Sterling version.

I find the Austin show utterly unwatchenable. I even find it a crying shame they deared to release this on DVD. After the first 20 minutes you find yourself watching studio music played over filmed images. Jagger's vocals are overdubbed, as are most guitars and backup vocals. And unfortunately, the guitars are not overdubbed by any of the Stones. Little T&A is truly painfull to watch. It shows a fallen rockstar, struggling with the lyrics, with the chords and tempo.

The Rio show is o.k. up to the B-stage, then it becomes a bore.

Disc three and four are really nice though. It makes it worthwhile to buy this DVD. I think the documentaries are really nice, and I really like the bonus tracks, with Get Up Stand Up as a beautiful stand-out. But what I like most about this DVD is that it shows that in the end, the Stones are just as any other band. They just love to drink a beer with each other in the dressing room, and that's why they're still doing it. They are just as amazed as any band by the rediculous super bowl mania, they're nervous about Rio, and they just love to play together.

Especially Jagger really surprised me. He's getting older, and he comes over as actually a really nice guy. He's not this semi-rock-god-sex-symbol anymore now he's in his 60's. He comes over as a guy you meet in a bar and have a beer with, just really friendly and relaxed.

Mathijs

JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mathijs Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Well, I checked the BB DVD, and there's no
> Chuck
> > involved at all. Jagger starts the intro, and
> > Keith follows. Both Jagger and Richards have
> the
> > Fulltone Tape Delay full on, so it sounds like
> > there's more guitars involved. But there's no
> > samples or trickery here.
> >
> > Mathijs
>
>
> But that could be overdubs right? I mean: It's not
> like this DVD isn't overdubbed. We all know that.

RFD from Rio doesn't sound overdubbed to me, nor does it looks that way.

Mathijs



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-08-19 14:55 by Mathijs.

Seems like we disagree. I find the third disc to be the worst one actually. Too messy for me. Austin should be renamed to Awesome. Rio is a great concert although it wasn't their best performance on this tour. I've never seen Keith so concentrated as on his Austin set. Lil' T&A and LTG are both great to me.

JumpingKentFlash

JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Austin should be renamed to Awesome.

So you like the Stones best when all guitars and vocals are overdubbed in a studio? On half the Austin tracks Keith does not play guitar -and you favour that?

Weird, really weird.

Mathijs

Not all vocals and guitars are overdubbed. You know that as well as me. You can see Keith playing a lot actually. I bet you like Get Yer Ya-Ya's Out right? Newsflash: It's overdubbed and cut to pieces.


BTW: Are you coming to London? Wouldn't be the same without you.

JumpingKentFlash

JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not all vocals and guitars are overdubbed. You
> know that as well as me. You can see Keith playing
> a lot actually.

Play the DVD with headphones on, and you hear that after 25 minutes about all parts of Keith have been overdubbed. Listen to Under My Thumb. You see Keith playing, but you hear Pierre.

> I bet you like Get Yer Ya-Ya's Out
> right? Newsflash: It's overdubbed and cut to
> pieces.

Sorry, not true. About half of Jagger's vocals are overdubbed, and Sympathy misses a verse. No guitars have been cut or added, not one song besides Sympathy is altered in any way.

Mathijs

And to ad: I expected a fairly horrible DVD, but to my own surprise it's really nice to watch and listen. The Stones play a lot better than I expected, and they sound really good. It's also great to see a more 'human' band than we did see the last 10 years. The only thing I hate about this DVD is the fact that they overdubbed a large part of the Austin show, and overdubbed it so obvious by other guitarists.

There's plenty of things I could have moaned about (the terribly slick sounding Darryl Jones, Lisa Fisher's destruction of Gimme SHelter), but I didn't: it's a very nice, enjoyable DVD, you only have to throw disc one in the bin.

Mathijs

So...... Coming to London or not?


BTW: If there is a disc that should be "Thrown in the bin" as you say, it should be the third one. Only redeeming part is the Bonnie Raitt duo. Of course the songs on it are great, but it's simply way too much repetition and it's way too messy (And for Argentina - A lousy picture quality).

JumpingKentFlash

Mathijs Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> > I bet you like Get Yer Ya-Ya's Out
> > right? Newsflash: It's overdubbed and cut to
> > pieces.
>
> Sorry, not true. About half of Jagger's vocals are
> overdubbed, and Sympathy misses a verse. No
> guitars have been cut or added, not one song
> besides Sympathy is altered in any way.
>
> Mathijs

I think this is wrong - lots of stuff were done to this one. Adding audience (which by he way sometimes is Mick and Keith themselves, and some of the same audience is used to day both on stage and on live recordings eg. beginning of MR) and as far as I remember there is three guitars in some places in LWM.

Steen G Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think this is wrong - lots of stuff were done to
> this one. Adding audience (which by he way
> sometimes is Mick and Keith themselves, and some
> of the same audience is used to day both on stage
> and on live recordings eg. beginning of MR) and as
> far as I remember there is three guitars in some
> places in LWM.

not correct. check the "Revelations on the Rolling Stones" page. he really does the analysis. the surprising thing is how much the banter was cut up and rearranged, but there are no definite guitar O/Ds.

JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So...... Coming to London or not?
>

Nope, I don't see a reason why. They don't offer anything anymore I would want to see live.

Mathijs