Couple of Brian questions

1) What exactly did Brian contribute to Beggar's Banquet besides slide on No Expectations?

2) Why was Brian's guitar playing edited out You Can't Always Get What You Want and Jumpin' Jack Flash at the Rock N' Roll Circus?

3) Is he REALLY playing the slide guitar on No Expectations at the Rock N' Roll circus live or was it overdubbed by someone else later?

4) I've read that Sympathy for the Devil in it's final form contained an acoustic guitar part by Brian, which was muted in the final mixing of the song--Is this true, any way to hear it?

Also, who do you believe on Brian? Keith, who makes it seem like Brian was barely involved and was literally a non-entity in the band after 1965, or Bill who claims Brian founded the band, got it going etc? Basically Keith calls the Stones "Ian Stewart's band" and has downplayed any contributions by Brian to be almost non-existent after 1965...While Bill made it seem like the Stones were Brian's band. And I always believed the "Psychedelic" albums were musically fueled by Brian's experiments with exotic instruments.....

1) Likely it's Brian on the haunting, hevily reverbed harp on the churus' and fade out of "Jigsaw Puzzle".

2) Dunno, always wondered that myself. Outta tune, or worse, couldn't remember the chords? Apparently there are tapes of the "Circus" pre-'95 remix where he's not down-mixed. Gazza?

3) Yeah, it's clearly Brian playing, and live.

4) I'm assuming you've seen/heard Goddards film 'One Plus One' (aka 'Sympathy For the Devil') which features a lot of footage from the Olympic Studios sessions for 'Beggars Banquet'. "Sympathy..." goes through many different forms and styles before the samba version we all know, and Brian is visible on some of those early attaempts with an accoustic (though pretty much inaudible).
Never heard about him playing on the finished track.

Brian formed and named The Rolling Stones in 1962. Stu was the second member. In the begining he was the driving force. But by 1968 his involvement had decreased signifficantly for a number of reasons.

A good book on Brian, recommended to me by another RO member, is Death Of A Rolling Stone by Mandy Aftel. Keith was very helpful to Mandy in interviews and providing her information.

I'll have to get that book "Death Of A Rolling Stone" it must be a book that more popular in Europe,  can't seem to find it in Canada.

Heart Of Stone wrote on Dec 11^th, 2012 at 7:36am:

I'll have to get that book "Death Of A Rolling Stone" it must be a book that more popular in Europe,  can't seem to find it in Canada.

Hard to find and out of print I believe, but a real good book on Brian.

Brian founded the band--put an ad in the jazz paper. And stu answered the ad. Brian wanted Keith in the band, but Keith wouldn't come without Mick. Brian thought Mick's voice was a bit weak, and might not hold up during long sessions. Brian named the band, promoted the band, kept the books, and charted their early musical direction.

Obviously, he was very musically inclined and could get something "nice" out of any instrument he picked up. His colorful flavor added immensely to the Stones' songs during the 8 years he was in the band. When Andrew Loog Oldham started managing the band, he decided that Mick & Keith should start writing the songs. Brian was gradually edged out of the area of musical direction and, due to a number of reasons, delved more and more into drugs and alcohol. I still think he was a very viable member of the band until late in '68. It is said that he wanted to leave the band, and get back to his bluesy roots, as early as 1965, but, Andrew and Mick feared that, as popular as Brian was, the band might fall apart without him. So, he stayed...until June of '69.

Stu helped keep things together in the band. He was vastly important in many areas concerning the Stones. But Brian founded The Rollin'/Rolling Stones. It was Brian's "baby". :)

Sioux wrote on Dec 12^th, 2012 at 7:52pm:

Brian founded the band--put an ad in the jazz paper. And stu answered the ad. Brian wanted Keith in the band, but Keith wouldn't come without Mick. Brian thought Mick's voice was a bit weak, and might not hold up during long sessions. Brian named the band, promoted the band, kept the books, and charted their early musical direction. Obviously, he was very musically inclined and could get something "nice" out of any instrument he picked up. His colorful flavor added immensely to the Stones' songs during the 8 years he was in the band. When Andrew Loog Oldham started managing the band, he decided that Mick & Keith should start writing the songs. Brian was gradually edged out of the area of musical direction and, due to a number of reasons, delved more and more into drugs and alcohol. I still think he was a very viable member of the band until late in '68. It is said that he wanted to leave the band, and get back to his bluesy roots, as early as 1965, but, Andrew and Mick feared that, as popular as Brian was, the band might fall apart without him. So, he stayed...until June of '69. Stu helped keep things together in the band. He was vastly important in many areas concerning the Stones. But Brian founded The Rollin'/Rolling Stones. It was Brian's "baby". :)

Why do you think Keith hates Brian so much these days, that he wrote his autobiography to diminish Brian as much as possible? His book would have you believe Brian wasn't really involved outside of organizing some gigs in 1963 and playing basically as a "Session Stone" after 1965....Even in older interviews in the 80s and 90s, Keith basically said the things you did, how important was to the band...Now it's all "It was Stu's band from day one, Brian was just sort of there for a few years, and fuck him, he deserved to die anyway so if he was murdered, I'd let the guy go with involuntary manslaughter." That's some serious bitterness built up and no empathy for a guy who died at just 27. Brian was no doubt very much difficult but it seems like Keith has no empathy sometimes. Sometimes I think both Mick and Keith are heartless.....

I for sure don't know.....I think some of it might be anger ("How dare you die like that, Brian?") and guilt---for treating him badly, not realizing that Brian really needed help and support that they couldn't or wouldn't give him, or maybe for the whole Anita thing......at one time, early on, Brian and Keith were really close....

[quote author=StonesFan1990 link=1355162847/0#6 date=1355364919]

"It was Stu's band from day one, Brian was just sort of there for a few years, and fuck him, he deserved to die anyway so if he was murdered, I'd let the guy go with involuntary manslaughter."

You ask a question about Brian Jones, then fabricate a vicious quote from Keith Richards about him?  Keith has been callous to be sure, but never like that.  If you are going to paraphrase don't use quotation marks.  And do some more research before you post.

Zack wrote on Dec 14^th, 2012 at 5:06pm:

[quote author=StonesFan1990 link=1355162847/0#6 date=1355364919] "It was Stu's band from day one, Brian was just sort of there for a few years, and fuck him, he deserved to die anyway so if he was murdered, I'd let the guy go with involuntary manslaughter." You ask a question about Brian Jones, then fabricate a vicious quote from Keith Richards about him?  Keith has been callous to be sure, but never like that.  If you are going to paraphrase don't use quotation marks.  And do some more research before you post.

I was basically paraphrasing the general sentiment in Keith's autobiography. He diminishes Brian to the point of being just some guy who impressed him with his slide guitar skills and who helped out in the beginning but basically became a session musician after 1965. And he does say even if Brian was murdered, he'd give the murderers involuntary manslaughter cause Brian probably provoked 'em.