ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board

Riffhard

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Rocks Off Rules You Bastards

Posts: 1,936
Gender: male

Re: I Think They Are.... ....from Ian
Reply #100 - Sep 6^th, 2008 at 12:09pm

gimmekeef wrote on Sep 6^th, 2008 at 9:39am:

LOL..I'm glad I popped out of the political threads and landed in here!. Searching for the truth is a lonely journey.Back to my scotch carry on guys and let me know when the non recording is finished will ya?

LOL! Can't say as I blame ya! Bring on the non new Stones album!

Riffy

Back to top

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&"When all government...in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided...” Thomas Jefferson&&&&"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have. The course of history shows us that as a government grows, liberty decreases." — Thomas Jefferson&&&&&&&&We're not old men.We don't bother about petty morals--Keef&&&&Actually, it only takes one drink to get me loaded. Trouble is, I can't remember if it's the thirteenth or fourteenth. &&-- George Burns&&&&&&I ain't no leftist!-Bob Dylan&&&&"In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a brave and scarce

IP Logged

fireontheplatter

Ex Member

Re: I Think They Are.... ....from Ian
Reply #101 - Sep 6^th, 2008 at 1:12pm

i just learned the other day that all the songs from tattoo you were songs that were worked on during earlier recording sessions. i found this interesting. back when this album came out i didn't pick the stones apart as much as as i do today. if and when they do come out with a new record and i catch wind they are songs that were worked on earlier i won't be as excited. i think it is more exciting for the fans to hear brand new songs.

this does not count for cover songs they do.

Are you fucking serious?

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 6^th, 2008 at 1:13pm by N/A »

IP Logged

Gazza

Unholy Trinity Admin

Offline

Rat Bastid "We piss
anywhere, man.."

Posts: 13,213
Belfast, UK
Gender: male

Re: I Think They Are.... ....from Ian
Reply #102 - Sep 6^th, 2008 at 1:33pm

Quote:

i just learned the other day that all the songs from tattoo you were songs that were worked on during earlier recording sessions. i found this interesting. back when this album came out i didn't pick the stones apart as much as as i do today. if and when they do come out with a new record and i catch wind they are songs that were worked on earlier i won't be as excited. i think it is more exciting for the fans to hear brand new songs.

this does not count for cover songs they do.

Are you fucking serious?

All but "Heaven" and "Neighbours" were old songs. However, considering the Stones were very prolific between 1977-79 (some 40 plus songs were cut for BOTH Some Girls and ER), its a bit of a different perspective to what we'd be looking at now if they were to unearth old cuts.

The oldest songs on Tattoo You dated from GHS sessions in late 1972. So those songs were just over 8 years old when the Stones started putting Tattoo You together in spring 1981. They had recorded five albums in that time frame - all of them apart from IORR had leftovers which were used in some form on Tattoo you. If the Stones were to go back eight years now, it would still be 3 years AFTER they had recorded BTB, their last but one album to date.

Back to top

IP Logged

Pdog

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Posts: 6,123
aTx
Gender: male

Re: I Think They Are.... ....from Ian
Reply #103 - Sep 6^th, 2008 at 2:00pm

Gazza wrote on Sep 6^th, 2008 at 9:26am:

Quote:

Ian Billen wrote on Sep 6^th, 2008 at 2:10am:

Ok.

I had a thought. Should they start fresh with all new material as far as this one goes (whenever it goes) or should they look over and try and work up stuff from their previous few albums that never got finished or had the chance to come to fruition?

Ian

i prefer they start fresh myself...all the leftovers can come later.

Yes. Keep the leftovers 'as is' for the Universal re-issues!

However, they could do that and still use some basic ideas for new songs. They do that on most records anyway, including the last one as there was some unused and reworked Mick solo material on it.

In the end it doesnt matter. The end justifies the means. Tattoo You, by rights, should have ended up being a dreadful album, going by the way it was conceived. To their credit they pulled out something of a masterpiece.

Same for Exile, just for different reasons...

Back to top

IP Logged

BILL PERKS Rocks Off Regular Offline Posts: 1,188 NJ	Re: I Think They Are.... ....from Ian Reply #104 - Sep 6^th, 2008 at 2:24pm THE RAIN FALLS FOR THE JUST AND THE UNJUST
Back to top	IP Logged

glencar Ex Member	Re: I Think They Are.... ....from Ian Reply #105 - Sep 6^th, 2008 at 10:20pm IanBillen keeps it rockin'!
Back to top	IP Logged

Ian Billen

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Rocks Off Rules

Posts: 1,562
USA
Gender: male

Re: I Think They Are.... ....from Ian
Reply #106 - Sep 7^th, 2008 at 12:13am

Rocks Off never ceases to surprise me. I had figured most, if not all would want them to digg to the past (in hopes maybe there is a possibility of a Tattoo You'ish result of some sort).

Not so. Interesting. I never understood this>>> Why did they want to go through all that old stuff in 80-81 for Tattoo You? Sure there were just loads of rough tracks and ideas but why? I mean from Some Girls sessions you got a good half of Emotional Resque and Tattoo You as well. So why not try for a whole new bunch back then to see what they came up with? Instead they chose to digg through the seventies for stuff.

Kinda out of character for them to digg that far back. And it was surprising being as the last major writing push they did was three years earlier with Some Girls. You'd of thought Mick, being how he is would of said ..." enough with all that, lets stop the dwelling in the past bit here, we have milked that well enough lets write a bunch of new stuff and record it" But he didn't??? As I read, they wanted to do a big tour and were short on time but still wanted an album so they chose that approach. Still, I am surprised Mick just didn't say they should record all brand new stuff and do it in 82 instead of 81 but they didn't?

Can anyone help summarize why they chose this approach with Tattoo You?

Ian

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 7^th, 2008 at 1:34am by Ian Billen »

Thought you were dinner ...but you were the shark ..

IP Logged

Pdog

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Posts: 6,123
aTx
Gender: male

Re: I Think They Are.... ....from Ian
Reply #107 - Sep 7^th, 2008 at 7:54am

Ian Billen wrote on Sep 7^th, 2008 at 12:13am:

Rocks Off never ceases to surprise me. I had figured most, if not all would want them to digg to the past (in hopes maybe there is a possibility of a Tattoo You'ish result of some sort).

Not so. Interesting. I never understood this>>> Why did they want to go through all that old stuff in 80-81 for Tattoo You? Sure there were just loads of rough tracks and ideas but why? I mean from Some Girls sessions you got a good half of Emotional Resque and Tattoo You as well. So why not try for a whole new bunch back then to see what they came up with? Instead they chose to digg through the seventies for stuff.

Kinda out of character for them to digg that far back. And it was surprising being as the last major writing push they did was three years earlier with Some Girls. You'd of thought Mick, being how he is would of said ..." enough with all that, lets stop the dwelling in the past bit here, we have milked that well enough lets write a bunch of new stuff and record it" But he didn't??? As I read, they wanted to do a big tour and were short on time but still wanted an album so they chose that approach. Still, I am surprised Mick just didn't say they should record all brand new stuff and do it in 82 instead of 81 but they didn't?

Can anyone help summarize why they chose this approach with Tattoo You?

Ian

The answer is in your post, no time record and time for a tour. The band was in the begining phases of the ego's between Mick and Keith that would lead to the split. Mick was already thinking possible solo career and Keith was doing drugs and being cool. It was time to tour and they needed an album, that was what they had to do, it is the way it had been. ER was already old, in music terms of the time. They hadn't toured Eurpe since 1976, Keth's arrests made for problems and the machine needs to run or it dies. They had tons of music recorded already, in preparation for Keith going to jail, and songs written, so they polished it up and threw together a record in a short amount of time.
what i clearly remember, and my first Stones education. Was that many older fans didn't like hastiness of Tat U. I was hipped to the massive amounts of music in the vaults, and told, I better get used to Stones albums like this, full of songs like Heaven... I was excited, and liked most of the album, but with no context, The Stones becoming a band that did only songs like Heaven frightened me. I was excited to see them play, the older fans weren't, at least not around Philly. In 1978 The Stones dissapointed the fans with a famously bad show in Philly. So the rush to tour was also important, to show people they could compete in the ever changing and very competitive and lucrative music industry.

Back to top

IP Logged

gimmekeef Rocks Off Regular Offline Posts: 5,753 Ontario Canada Gender:	Re: I Think They Are.... ....from Ian Reply #108 - Sep 7^th, 2008 at 10:54am If they didnt rework Start Me Up from its reggae roots Tattoo You would never have been much of a hit or perhaps ever released.That song ruled the airwaves and sold the album.It was the hand of fate I guess.
Back to top	"Runnin Like A Cat In A Thunderstorm" IP Logged

Gazza

Unholy Trinity Admin

Offline

Rat Bastid "We piss
anywhere, man.."

Posts: 13,213
Belfast, UK
Gender: male

Re: I Think They Are.... ....from Ian
Reply #109 - Sep 7^th, 2008 at 12:40pm

Pdog wrote on Sep 7^th, 2008 at 7:54am:

Ian Billen wrote on Sep 7^th, 2008 at 12:13am:

Rocks Off never ceases to surprise me. I had figured most, if not all would want them to digg to the past (in hopes maybe there is a possibility of a Tattoo You'ish result of some sort).

Not so. Interesting. I never understood this>>> Why did they want to go through all that old stuff in 80-81 for Tattoo You? Sure there were just loads of rough tracks and ideas but why? I mean from Some Girls sessions you got a good half of Emotional Resque and Tattoo You as well. So why not try for a whole new bunch back then to see what they came up with? Instead they chose to digg through the seventies for stuff.

Kinda out of character for them to digg that far back. And it was surprising being as the last major writing push they did was three years earlier with Some Girls. You'd of thought Mick, being how he is would of said ..." enough with all that, lets stop the dwelling in the past bit here, we have milked that well enough lets write a bunch of new stuff and record it" But he didn't??? As I read, they wanted to do a big tour and were short on time but still wanted an album so they chose that approach. Still, I am surprised Mick just didn't say they should record all brand new stuff and do it in 82 instead of 81 but they didn't?

Can anyone help summarize why they chose this approach with Tattoo You?

Ian

The answer is in your post, no time record and time for a tour. The band was in the begining phases of the ego's between Mick and Keith that would lead to the split. Mick was already thinking possible solo career and Keith was doing drugs and being cool. It was time to tour and they needed an album, that was what they had to do, it is the way it had been. ER was already old, in music terms of the time. They hadn't toured Eurpe since 1976, Keth's arrests made for problems and the machine needs to run or it dies. They had tons of music recorded already, in preparation for Keith going to jail, and songs written, so they polished it up and threw together a record in a short amount of time.
what i clearly remember, and my first Stones education. Was that many older fans didn't like hastiness of Tat U. I was hipped to the massive amounts of music in the vaults, and told, I better get used to Stones albums like this, full of songs like Heaven... I was excited, and liked most of the album, but with no context, The Stones becoming a band that did only songs like Heaven frightened me. I was excited to see them play, the older fans weren't, at least not around Philly. In 1978 The Stones dissapointed the fans with a famously bad show in Philly. So the rush to tour was also important, to show people they could compete in the ever changing and very competitive and lucrative music industry.

Absolutely correct. Worth adding too that within 3-4 weeks of the '78 American tour finishing, they were recording in Hollywood. Keith's trial was coming up in October and with a trafficking charge still hanging over his head, it did look very possible that - even if it was going to be merely a 'possession' charge (which was eventually the case) he may be looking at going to jail for some time. They were stockpiling songs (which could be completed later without Keith, if need be). Nothing from that LA session was ever released officially but the fact that it took place and lasted for a few weeks is pretty significant when it comes to viewing how they saw their fiture plans at that time.

Back to top

IP Logged

Gazza

Unholy Trinity Admin

Offline

Rat Bastid "We piss
anywhere, man.."

Posts: 13,213
Belfast, UK
Gender: male

Re: I Think They Are.... ....from Ian
Reply #110 - Sep 7^th, 2008 at 1:34pm

Ian Billen wrote on Sep 7^th, 2008 at 12:13am:

Rocks Off never ceases to surprise me. I had figured most, if not all would want them to digg to the past (in hopes maybe there is a possibility of a Tattoo You'ish result of some sort).

well, two or three people is not an entire website.

However, youre not getting the point, I think. You strike me as someone who likes to believe that the Stones are capable of writing high quality new songs for a new album. Nothing wrong with that. However, that doesnt equate with wanting them to dig out very old discarded songs.

You cant compare Tattoo You with what you're suggesting. The Stones were quite prolific in the 70's. They finished and released more songs in a period of 18 months in that decade than their combined total of released songs in the last DECADE.

Most of the songs that were worked on for Tattoo You - whilst they came from their last or last but one album - were still less than three and a half years old ("Some Girls" was recorded from Oct 1977 onwards. "Tattoo You" was assembled in spring/early summer 1981). Despite a few cameos here and there from Mick Taylor, Wayne Perkins and co on the older songs, it was still basically the same band. That, plus most of the songs on Tattoo You were pretty much finished already - most of the band werent present at the sessions in New York in 1981 when the overdubs were done.

The Stones most recent record is already three years old (the songs were recorded up to 4 years ago) - so thats an even bigger time frame than most of the songs from Tattoo You. If they were to go back to their previous album for leftovers, thats 11-12 years. That would be like the Stones using Let It Bleed outtakes for Tattoo You. If they go back even three or four albums you're going to have an album featuring songs which include Bill Wyman and Ian Stewart, who has been dead for almost a quarter of a century.

Its a different era and theyre a different band - and there's nothing that screams 'washed up old has beens' than needing to rely on songs from 15,20 and 25 years ago to fill an album.

Most Stones albums in the last 40 years have featured songs which were originally recorded and/or written for previous sessions (including solo ones in some cases) - ie Let It Bleed, Sticky Fingers, Exile, GHS, Emotional Rescue, Tattoo You, Undercover. Steel wheels, Bigger Bang and others. So, its not unusual for songs to take a while to see fruition. However, when you go for (as has been the case with the last four releases) three and a half, five, three and eight years between albums - albums which with the exception of Voodoo Lounge didnt have a lot of excess material - that doesnt suggest a lot of leftovers.

Like I said earlier, the main focus should be on making a new record which is good, regardless of how it came about (a lot of people hated BTB seemingly because it was assembled in a way which suggested Mick and Keith barely worked together. It didnt matter a shit to me, I thought it was a great record and thats all that counts). However, I dont really think theres a need for them to go back decades to find songs. Especially as the indications are that the Universal remasters deal will provide an alternative outlet for those songs to be released ina context appropriate to when they were recorded.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 7^th, 2008 at 1:37pm by Gazza »

IP Logged

glencar

Ex Member

Re: I Think They Are.... ....from Ian
Reply #111 - Sep 7^th, 2008 at 2:02pm

Gazza wrote on Sep 7^th, 2008 at 12:40pm:

Pdog wrote on Sep 7^th, 2008 at 7:54am:

Ian Billen wrote on Sep 7^th, 2008 at 12:13am:

Rocks Off never ceases to surprise me. I had figured most, if not all would want them to digg to the past (in hopes maybe there is a possibility of a Tattoo You'ish result of some sort).

Not so. Interesting. I never understood this>>> Why did they want to go through all that old stuff in 80-81 for Tattoo You? Sure there were just loads of rough tracks and ideas but why? I mean from Some Girls sessions you got a good half of Emotional Resque and Tattoo You as well. So why not try for a whole new bunch back then to see what they came up with? Instead they chose to digg through the seventies for stuff.

Kinda out of character for them to digg that far back. And it was surprising being as the last major writing push they did was three years earlier with Some Girls. You'd of thought Mick, being how he is would of said ..." enough with all that, lets stop the dwelling in the past bit here, we have milked that well enough lets write a bunch of new stuff and record it" But he didn't??? As I read, they wanted to do a big tour and were short on time but still wanted an album so they chose that approach. Still, I am surprised Mick just didn't say they should record all brand new stuff and do it in 82 instead of 81 but they didn't?

Can anyone help summarize why they chose this approach with Tattoo You?

Ian

The answer is in your post, no time record and time for a tour. The band was in the begining phases of the ego's between Mick and Keith that would lead to the split. Mick was already thinking possible solo career and Keith was doing drugs and being cool. It was time to tour and they needed an album, that was what they had to do, it is the way it had been. ER was already old, in music terms of the time. They hadn't toured Eurpe since 1976, Keth's arrests made for problems and the machine needs to run or it dies. They had tons of music recorded already, in preparation for Keith going to jail, and songs written, so they polished it up and threw together a record in a short amount of time.
what i clearly remember, and my first Stones education. Was that many older fans didn't like hastiness of Tat U. I was hipped to the massive amounts of music in the vaults, and told, I better get used to Stones albums like this, full of songs like Heaven... I was excited, and liked most of the album, but with no context, The Stones becoming a band that did only songs like Heaven frightened me. I was excited to see them play, the older fans weren't, at least not around Philly. In 1978 The Stones dissapointed the fans with a famously bad show in Philly. So the rush to tour was also important, to show people they could compete in the ever changing and very competitive and lucrative music industry.

Absolutely correct. Worth adding too that within 3-4 weeks of the '78 American tour finishing, they were recording in Hollywood. Keith's trial was coming up in October and with a trafficking charge still hanging over his head, it did look very possible that - even if it was going to be merely a 'possession' charge (which was eventually the case) he may be looking at going to jail for some time. They were stockpiling songs (which could be completed later without Keith, if need be). Nothing from that LA session was ever released officially but the fact that it took place and lasted for a few weeks is pretty significant when it comes to viewing how they saw their fiture plans at that time.

Gazza, what were the unreleased songs? Was it those country songs written by others?

Back to top

IP Logged

left shoe shuffle

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Posts: 4,141

Re: I Think They Are.... ....from Ian
Reply #112 - Sep 7^th, 2008 at 2:13pm

From Nico's invaluable Stones resource - www.nzentgraf.de

780823A 23rd August - 8th September: Los Angeles, RCA Studios. Producers: The Glimmer
Twins & Chris Kimsey. Sound engineer: Michael Carnavale. Additional musicians:
Ian McLagan (p, org)/Bobby Keys (sax)/Jim Keltner (perc)
- Back In The USA (Chuck Berry)
- Blues With A Feeling (Marion Walter Jacobs)
- I’ll Let You Know I (MJ/KR) -instrumental, piano intro
- I’ll Let You Know II (MJ/KR) -instrumental, guitar intro
- I Ain’t Superstitious (Willie Dixon)
- Jimmy Reed Jam ( ) -instrumental Blues jam
- Knee Trembler (MJ/KR) -instrumental jam with sax
- My First Plea I (Jimmy Reed) -rehearsal 1
- My First Plea II (Jimmy Reed) -rehearsal 2
- My First Plea III (Jimmy Reed) -rehearsal 3
- My First Plea IV (Jimmy Reed) -rehearsal 4
- Not The Way To Go II (MJ/KR) -faster rhythm than I, instrumental
- Not The Way To Go III (MJ/KR) -faster rhythm than 1, with vocals
- One Night (Dave Bartholomew/Pearl King)
- Serious Love (Sly Dunbar)
- Summer Romance IV (MJ/KR) -nearly finished lyrics
- Tallahassee Lassie (Frank C. Slay Jun./Bob Crewe/F.A. Picariello)
- The Harder They Come II (Jimmy Cliff) -MJ on backing vocals, much organ
- The Harder They Come III (Jimmy Cliff) -7"-version
- What Am I Living For I (Fred Jacobson/Art Harris) -with organ start and long ending
- What Am I Living For II (Fred Jacobson/Art Harris) -with guitar start and short ending
- What Gives You The Right I (MJ/KR) -early lyrics, longer than II
- What Gives You The Right II (MJ/KR) -early lyrics, shorter than I
- What Gives You The Right III (MJ/KR) -with complete lyrics and pedal steel
- Where The Boys Go I (MJ/KR) -early lyrics
- Where The Boys Go II (MJ/KR) -early lyrics, incomplete with piano ending
- Your Angel Steps Out Of Heaven (Jack Ripley)

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 7^th, 2008 at 2:16pm by left shoe shuffle »

IP Logged

glencar Ex Member	Re: I Think They Are.... ....from Ian Reply #113 - Sep 7^th, 2008 at 2:15pm Thanks, muffle. I have much of that on a crappy CD I bought just before the internets took over.
Back to top	IP Logged

Gazza

Unholy Trinity Admin

Offline

Rat Bastid "We piss
anywhere, man.."

Posts: 13,213
Belfast, UK
Gender: male

Re: I Think They Are.... ....from Ian
Reply #114 - Sep 7^th, 2008 at 2:47pm

Quote:

Thanks, muffle. I have much of that on a crappy CD I bought just before the internets took over.

Yeah, I think its on albums like "The Harder They Come" amongst others. Excellent quality as I recall (or close to it), although as with a lot of these studio boots, Mick's maybe a bit off mike or treating it as a run through.

All that stuff is probably just from one or two day's sessions, though. As they recorded for two weeks (according to Nico) there's obviously going to be more songs that arent documented, let alone circulating.

Back to top

IP Logged

Ian Billen

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Rocks Off Rules

Posts: 1,562
USA
Gender: male

Re: I Think They Are.... ....from Ian
Reply #115 - Sep 7^th, 2008 at 9:23pm

Ah-huh,

I see. I knew they were in a rush of sorts to get an album out in 81 but I did not know exactly why. I thought I may of been missing something (which I was a bit) until now? So it was to denounce the hit and miss reviews of the 78 live shows and now I know why they had Sooooo many songs come out of the 78 sessions. Because Keith's trial was not until October and they were stock piling the tunes in case Keith had to go away for a couple years.

Very, Very, good.

Thank you everyone.

Ian

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 8^th, 2008 at 1:09am by Ian Billen »

Thought you were dinner ...but you were the shark ..

IP Logged

Ian Billen

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Rocks Off Rules

Posts: 1,562
USA
Gender: male

Re: I Think They Are.... ....from Ian
Reply #116 - Sep 8^th, 2008 at 1:19am

Gazza Wrote:

"However, youre not getting the point, I think. You strike me as someone who likes to believe that the Stones are capable of writing high quality new songs for a new album. Nothing wrong with that. However, that doesnt equate with wanting them to dig out very old discarded songs. "

______________________

Good insight by the way,

Actually, I was not suggesting they use out-takes. I was suggesting they may want to look for some older riffs, demos, rough tracks, or ideas from their previous few albums and see if they had something good they let go and then work on them and record em. I wasn't talking about actual out-takes. Sorry if I mislead any of you.

That is what I was asking. I am still on the fence on whether I would want them to do this at all. I'm just not sure. Part of me says I'd want them to forget the past and start fresh, from a clean slate and see what type of album they make. But then I think, well heck, couldn't hurt to look for a week or two. Even if it brings only one really good song, it would be worth it.

Ian

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 8^th, 2008 at 1:22am by Ian Billen »

Thought you were dinner ...but you were the shark ..

IP Logged

Gazza

Unholy Trinity Admin

Offline

Rat Bastid "We piss
anywhere, man.."

Posts: 13,213
Belfast, UK
Gender: male

Re: I Think They Are.... ....from Ian
Reply #117 - Sep 8^th, 2008 at 6:14am

Fair enough. I would suppose its quite reasonable to expect that gets done anyway. Most acts do it. They may have not got anywhere with a song, but there may be a few lines and riffs from them which get used again.

'Too Tough' from 'Undercover' being a classic example of an entire tune being recycled (from the instrumental 'Cellophane Trouts' from 1975)

Back to top

IP Logged

glencar Ex Member	Re: I Think They Are.... ....from Ian Reply #118 - Sep 8^th, 2008 at 6:18am It also steals a bit from the JJF riff.
Back to top	IP Logged

Ian Billen

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Rocks Off Rules

Posts: 1,562
USA
Gender: male

Re: I Think They Are.... ....from Ian
Reply #119 - Sep 8^th, 2008 at 6:10pm

Gazza Wrote:

"Most acts do it. They may have not got anywhere with a song, but there may be a few lines and riffs from them which get used again."

_____________________

Yep. Most bigger acts have that opportunity and are being looked after. I saw my fair share of artists writing and the thing that seperates their ability to use ideas from previous sessions or older unused material is that lesser known/smaller acts simply don't hit record on their DAW (digital audio workstation) until they got something they like or have already started working on .. be it a riff, idea, rough track or whatever. All other aspects or ideas before that usually (and unfornately) are not recorded. They wait until it is something they think got some potential.

The thing is with most bigger artisit's 1/2 of half the time the Producer notices ideas where as the band does not and the tape/or disc is normally rolling anyway so it is all captured and can be reviewed at a later time.

Also at least 1/3 of the time the ideas that turn into songs were often overlooked by the artist themselves but the producer/engineer's caught it and asked the artist to go more into the direction of what they caught that the artist didn't.

In bigger names normally their are loads of tapes or it is all captured on hard disc which can be reviewed later if desired (which is in The Stones case). Lesser known acts are not being produced or looked after as the bigger acts and there is not nearly the amount of recordings (if any) to sift through when they were creating the tunes and as well there is no objective ear listening in or reviewing sessions later except possibly the band themselves (which doesn't cut it 100%).

With smaller acts all they have is what they liked and started to record whenever they heard something they finally thought had potential. In almost every case multitudes of ideas are swept under the carpet, and/or are not recorded at all.

*For those of you that record your own written music I would highly, ....very highly recommend investing in a portable hard disc with plenty of space and recording everything you do on your DAW or your PC (analogue tape is just WAaaay too expensive to do that with if you are a smaller act. Regardless, most smaller acts won't have the opportunity to use analogue tape to record to in the first place). Then transfer everything, all your sessions that you record or work on material from your DAW or PC to your portable hard disc and back it up some how. Preferably using a remote backup service. You can use a very basic, non-elaborate remote online backup service for storage/backup at as little as 50-60 cents per GB. Then ask friend or someone who knows your music genre and knows a bit about writing music to give a listen to some of those sessions to see what jumps out at them.

You will be VERY surprised what you may of completely missed or what they liked that you did not or initially did not give much thought.

Ian

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 8^th, 2008 at 6:24pm by Ian Billen »

Thought you were dinner ...but you were the shark ..

IP Logged