this came up as a digression on a couple of threads recently, so maybe it deserves a thread of its own.

the historical background: Nanker/Phelge (or Nanker Phelge, treated as a first name + surname rather than two surnames)
was the pseudonym invented to use on numbers that all the Stones were sharing songwriting credits on.
the term nanker refers to a grotesque face that the Stones enjoyed making;
Phelge is the surname of the fourth denizen of the infamous Edith Grove flat that Keith, Mick and Brian lived in
from late 62 to early 63. (Jimmy Phelge wasn't a songwriter or part of the Stones' organization -
they used his surname this way purely for kicks.)

the fascinating questions: there are lots of them! for example which tracks are they?
the recent ABKCO re-releases have changed the credits on some of the tracks that used to be Nanker/Phelge,
but here's the list good old wikipedia has: [en.wikipedia.org]
(i think that wants some corrective editing and sure hope someone knowledgeable will undertake it.)

another fascinating question: what did the Nanker/Phelge credit represent in terms of royalties?
i reckon most of us usually assume it meant that six Stones (including Stu, or five if not)
shared the royalties equally for those numbers - but on page 194 of Rolling With the Stones,
Bill give some figures on the way different Nanker/Phelge numbers were divided up in 1965:
"[Mick received] a tenth of Empty Heart, two fifteenths of It's Alright, one twelfth of Little by Little,
the same from Now I've Got a Witness, four twelfths of Play With Fire and a twelfth of Stoned.
He also got six twelfths of 2120 South Michigan Avenue, which was an instrumental."
some of that is easy enough to follow, but some of it is pretty odd; and the fact that it differs so much
from one number to the next is really interesting in itself. i have a couple of theories
about what we can fathom from this, but i'm sure you all have way more interesting ideas about it.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2007-03-08 19:15 by with sssoul.

another fascinating question: what's with Play With Fire? it's credited to Nanker/Phelge
but on page 163 Bill indicates that it's a Jagger/Richards composition.
of course Bill's book is entitled to include some errors like everyone else's books,
but since songwriting credits are something he's rather particular about, i find this interesting.

one more: back on the aforementioned page 194, Bill states that in 1965 Mick got
three twelfths of the royalties on Jagger/Richards numbers. even Bill calls that interesting. :E



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-03-03 17:03 by with sssoul.

Hey, thanks with sssoul! Interesting read -didn't know anything about this from before...

just nudging this up, as a result of causes ...

Song credits and publishing rights are two entirely different things, and both can be shared in any way you desire. For example: if I write a song, and the lead guitarist plays a legendary solo that is really important to the song, I can grant him "3/12" or whatever odd figure of the credits. In other words: the credits do not reflect whom wrote exactly what, but it reflects the deals that were made. The biggest deal was made between Jagger and Richards: whom ever writes a song, the credit will read Jagger/Richards. But from the 60's, Andrew Loog Oldham and Allen Klein both also shared big pieces of the pie. It's a fairly common thing to do by the way. Many bands have struck deals for example with producers and managers: if you pump money in this band you will be granted 25% of the credits.

Mathijs

>> In other words: the credits do not reflect whom wrote exactly what,
but it reflects the deals that were made. <<

i'd say the credits don't reflect the deals that were made either -
i mean: even just from the couple of examples i've listed, it's pretty clear that
we can't tell much at all about the financial side of things by looking at the credits.

with sssoul Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >> In other words: the credits do not reflect whom
> wrote exactly what,
> but it reflects the deals that were made. <<
>
> i'd say the credits don't reflect the deals that
> were made either -
> i mean: even just from the couple of examples i've
> listed, it's pretty clear that
> we can't tell much at all about the financial side
> of things by looking at the credits.

No, you can't tell anything from the credits printed on the sleeve. A song canbe credited to "Mr. Doe", but the actual credits AND publishing rights belong for 95% to Mr. Klein.

This is actually the trick that Allen Klein did in the mid-60's, and it wasn't until '71 that the Stones sorted this out: all credits and all publishing rights went to the authors and to Promopub BV.

Mathijs

>> all credits and all publishing rights went to the authors and to Promopub BV. <<

my understanding is that in the Klein Years the songwriting royalties were the only income that wasn't tied up by Klein -
but i guess i'm particularly interested in the way the examples i've quoted illustrate
that we know virtually nothing about how the songwriting royalties were/are divided up.
people sometimes get into such heated discussions about the credits/royalties, so it may be worth bearing in mind
that in fact we have no idea what the financial arrangements were/are.

Those are fascinating numbers. I am intersted in who got the other twelfths and all. I mean isn't six twelfths the same as one hlf? So wouldn't that be like Jagger -Richards? But when it is one sixth on an instrumental I assume they (plus Stu) divided it by six since the band wrote it.
But this all conjecture. Why e.g does he get 1/12 only of "Little by Little" a song that everyone agrees he wrote the lyrics to? Maybe because Phuil Spector who supposedly wrote the music was a much stronger force in the business back then than the Stones?
And the tenths on "Empty heart" I can only explain that someopne got 3 of them. You got five Stones; but you need to break it into tenths so that someone can get a fraction of fifths; ie 3.

"...no longer shall you trudge 'cross my peaceful mind."

Isnt Naker PHelge really
Brian jones?

[[FEAR; BUILDS WALLS.]]

>> Isnt Naker PHelge really Brian Jones? <<

no, it's the pen name used for group compositions.

>> Those are fascinating numbers. I am intersted in who got the other twelfths and all. <<

at face value one would assume that the tenths and twelfths result from the royalties agency
dividing each number in two - half for the music, half for the lyrics - and then dividing each of those halves
among the five Stones or the five Stones + Stu, as the case may be. so at least theoretically,
on a number that was treated as a group composition with group-authored lyrics, each person would get
two tenths or two twelfths; but if not everyone contributed to both the music and the lyrics,
you'd end up with people getting unequal numbers of tenths or twelfths. but that's all just theoretical.

it's also possible that at least some of these figures are careless bookkeeping -
for album tracks (as opposed to singles) does it make any real difference which track it is
that one member gets six twelfths of for writing the lyrics (for example) singlehanded?
"put Jagger down for six twelfths of one of these, who cares which" isn't hard to imagine.

>> But this all conjecture. <<

right - really the only thing that's clear from these figures is that the songwriting credits
don't tell us anything about how the royalties were/are being divided up.

(Mathijs has also mentioned ALO's and Easton's shares in all this. actually the way Bill describes it
it sounds like the managers weren't normally assigned songwriting royalties -
more like they took percentages of the royalties paid to the band. but that might have varied.)
(publishing royalties are another story, of course, but i'm trying to focus on the songwriting credits & royalties -
those are complicated enough, and frequently the subject of a lot of strident discussion.)

even though it's sheer speculation, i'm still really curious about Play With Fire.
Bill indicates on one page that it's a Jagger/Richards composition (and aren't they the only two Stones who play on it?),
but it's credited to Nanker/Phelge. maybe it was a case of "oops, everyone's bitching about royalties
so let's label this one Nanker/Phelge to even things up"?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2007-03-07 18:25 by with sssoul.

Perhaps the original credit was an error... that stuck... erm, for a good few years!?

:/

an error like that on a hit single would be pretty outstanding - but who knows.
(Play With Fire was the b-side to The Last Time; b-sides earn exactly the same royalties as a-sides.)

I'm Alright is quite weird too - isn't that a Bo Diddley (aka Ellas McDaniel) number??
maybe that's part of what's lurking behind the fifteen-way split on that one.

with sssoul Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> an error like that on a hit single would be pretty
> outstanding - but who knows.

I just thought I'd throw that in.

Somewhere in Bills book I 'think' I recall reading that Klein sold the rights or something for Nanker/Phelge in 1965/6!?

I have a bad cold so my mind isn't as sharp as it should be.

... are you thinking of ALO selling his share in the management/publishing to Klein?
what Klein then did with the rights sure was "something", but he hasn't sold them.
sorry about your cold - will popcorn help any?

with sssoul Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ... are you thinking of ALO selling his share in
> the management/publishing to Klein?
> what Klein then did with the rights sure was
> "something", but he hasn't sold them.

I'll get back to you on that...

> sorry about your cold - will popcorn help any?

Yes please, with sugar!

It is fair to say we do not know many facts about the financial arrangements, so we can not fully understand what is going on.

I always understood that making money was not the first concern of the boys (with the exception of Bill maybe) in the early years. I got the impression that playing the blues was all that mattered. Maybe it is my naivity, but I think that the way the credits and royalties are arranged in the early years at least illustrate that they were mainly happy that they had a way to reach an audience for their white boys blues.

Bill's Stone Alone is maybe a better book to study their financial situation in the early years then Rolling with the Stones.

yeah, at that stage the business aspects of things were pretty plainly not of major interest to the Stones,
but that doesn't mean they didn't mind when they felt ripped off/treated unfairly.
for example, by all accounts the whole band was pretty thoroughly pissed off when they learned about
Brian getting that extra 5 pounds per week, and the ways Easton had been ripping them off.
but i digress - sort of, anyway! sorry.

>> Bill's Stone Alone is maybe a better book to study their financial situation in the early years <<

i don't have that one - does he give any more details about the way the songwriting royalties were divided?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-03-07 16:26 by with sssoul.

The melody of Little By Little is from a Jimmy Reed song, Shame Shame Shame , so I don't think Spector wrote it.

Oh yes Keithfan, you are right of course. Who in reality thought up[ the melody is one thing. But it only has gone on record officially that Spector co- wrote it. (Little by Little). I wrote that IMO Jagger wrote the words because I have seen the song credited to Jagger-Spector, and I have also read in books that Jagger told the story about how he ran off and finished up the words for the song.
But I have also seen the song credited to Phelge - Spector. So who exactly is Phelge? Is he the music or the lyric half of N/P?

"...no longer shall you trudge 'cross my peaceful mind."

<< Is he the music or the lyric half of N/P? <<

neither - as in Jagger/Richards or Lennon/McCartney, it ain't a lyrics/music division,
it's more symbiotic than that. besides, it's just as often Nanker Phelge, like a first name + surname.
i thought Jagger and Spector wrote the words to Little by Little together -
and i'm curious: where have you seen it credited to Jagger/Spector?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-03-08 10:01 by with sssoul.

I don't know how to post pictures, but here's the Phelge/Spector reference on a (Russian) album sleeve. Notice how it refers to James Moore instead of his pseudonym Slim Harpo on King bee.

[www.allcdcovers.com]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2007-03-08 11:41 by marcovandereijk.

the 2002 ABKCO reissue also has it as Phelge/Spector - it's just treating Nanker Phelge as a first name + surname, right?
a Jagger/Spector credit would be an anomaly, though, given the Glimmer Twins' solidarity on crediting each other.

My Namesake!!

the rolling stones fake book:

2021 south michigan avenue: nanker phelge
Don't lie to me: mick jagger and keith richards ????
Empty heart: nanker phelge
I'd much rather be with the boy: andrew oldham and keith richards
I'm all right :mick jagger, keith richards, brian jones, bill wyman and charlie
watts ????
Little by little : nanker phelge and phil spector
Now I've got a witness: nanker phelge
Play with fire: nanker phelge
Stoned: nanker phelge
Talkin' about you: mick jagger and keith richards ????
the under assistant west coast promotion man: nanker phelge

I got an old sheet music : album of song hits with photographs 1964
(southern music publishing co.ltd, 8 denmark street London w.c.2)
in which "little by little" is credited: the rolling stones


As you see, nothing clear (if i dare say that)

It's not really on topic here but an oddity I've seen is "Gotta Get Away" is the only song I have seen on vinyl as Richards/Jagger. I have seen this on the US London 45 pressing and (I think) Decembers Children album pressings. Never seen it on CD releases. It has always stuck out in my mind since I was a kid and noticed it on the single.

Two experts in the art of 'Pulling a Nanker'.....

Photo credit unknown

Haha the nanker always makes me laugh!!!

This doesn't have anything to with song writting credits but
I've read that Jimmy Phelge is the Mr Jimmy that is referred
to in the song You can't always get what you want.

I went down to the Chelsea drugstore
To get your prescription filled
I was standin' in line with Mr. Jimmy
A-man, did he look pretty ill

Marv Peck

Y'all remember that rubber legged boy

This crediting business is really fascinating stuff, and much more complicated than I used to thought.

So when we talk about a particular song, and the people who have sothing to do with its creation and credition, there seems to be three levels:

(1) What says in the record cover or sleeve, for example, "Jagger-Richards", "Nanker Phelge", etc.
(2) What is the convention of the real credition, who will get money and exactly how much in percantage.
(3) Who actually did something -compose, made the key phrase, teh basic sequence, lyrics, play a theme, a riff, etc.- in the real world.

In ideal case, all of these levels are in par with each other, but - what makes this even more fascinating: it could be the case also that none is in analogy to each other - that each level lives its own independent life, so to say.

Take for example, the song "2120 sth Michincan Avanue". What we know about is that
(1) it is credited to "Nanker Phelge".
(2) half of the credits (6/12) go by convention to Mick Jagger.
(3) it is an impromptu instrumental blues jam, not much created anyone or everyone involved playing there. (Jagger played the harmonica, considered perhaps the lead instrument, and got his biggest share because of that?)

I have always known that there are some debates about the relation of (1) to (3) in particular Stones songs (ask Mick Taylor, Brian Jones, Ry Cooder, Billy Preston, etc.), but the real beef seems to be between (1) and (2) or (2) and (3). Could it be the case that Mick and Keith are not always sharing 50/50 of the creditions, when the songs are credited to Jagger/Richards. For example, Mick gets more from "Sympathy For The Devil" and Keith from "Ruby Tuesday"? Or could it be the case that even someone else might get something if he's been involved even though not getting his name on the sleeve? Or other way round. It would be very interesting to get know the exact numbers and deals behind particular songs. How much, for example Ronnie Wood is getting from certain Dirty Work cuts, etc. But it seems not to be common knowledge - only Wyman has been talking about it in some details.

But thinking about the tranformation from Nanker Phelge group efforts to Jagger/Richards songs, it might have been quite frustrating for the rest of the band (that is, Brian and Bill). Namely, in those Phelge songs - if I understand Bill rightly - they seemed to be quite careful distinguishing the percentages between the members (and that was news to me in this thread). There must have been a reason why for example Mick get different numbers from different songs (and not, for example, getting a constant share of the cake). I guess Bill himself - who most probably contributed as much or as less to Jagger/Richards songs as he did for Nanker Phelge songs, find himself not gaining anything any longer from 1966 on - it might frustrate him, doing the same thing, but not getting credited anymore, heh...

- Doxa