| September 17th, 2005 12:08 PM |
|
|
| Mel Belli |
From no less a source than ... Keith Richards.
A few extracts from Keith's Guitar World interview:
GW: "Take Me Down Slow" [sic] has such a nice chorus melody. It's a tiny bit like "Out of Time." Classic Stones. Is that style of melody more Mick's thing or more yours?
RICHARDS: That's hard to say. Mick came up with the basic song but I came up with the chimes [sings descending major chorus melody]. But I'd say that one's more Mick than me, absolutely. You can tell. The ones I laid on him were "Rough Justice," "Infamy," and "This Place Is Empty." So it's kind of half and half. Mick comes in far more prepared than I do. I like to come in with the bare bones of an idea and see how it builds. Mick prefers to come in pretty much knowing how it's supposed to go ... or thinking he knows Ha! Mick's like that.
GW: You're like a Zen monk -- always in the moment.
RICHARDS: Yeah, I don't plan ahead like Mick, but I can pick up on little nuances and ideas and incorporate them as we go along. I like to let things change. I don't like to put things in a cage.
GW: There's also a very nice guitar solo on "Take Me Down Slow" [sic again] -- those Steve Cropper-esque major thirds. I'm assuming it's you.
RICHARDS: Yes, it is. Thanks. I've actually been enjoying playing guitar very much. I kind of stopped playing awhile after the last tour. I did a few sessions -- with Willie Nelson and a couple of other tracks here and there. But sometimes after a tour you say, "Jesus, I've played enough. I can't think of another note." So you kind of lay back. But that's always a good thing, because when I do pick up the guitar again, after a few weeks or months, it's always like, "Oh, yeah! Hello, pal, I missed you." It's always a pleasure to re-meet.
GW: "Back of My Hand" is a great blues. What's the story behind that one?
RICHARDS: Mick came up with that. He started to play it one day on acoustic guitar and I started thinking, "prison songs..."
-------
OK. Cut through the self-flattering estimation of "kind of half and half" and the claptrap about not confining songs in "cages," and you have here Keith basically admitting to barely picking up his guitar between the Licks tour and the "Bang" sessions, and bringing to the latter only three new songs.
I have no doubt that Keith adds "little nuances and ideas" to Mick's songs, and if he really did come up with the descending melody of the "Let Me Down Slow" chorus, I'd say that was a pretty decisive contribution (similar to the great lines he played on "Already Over Me").
Still, I don't see how you come away from this interview denying that Mick wrote the lion's share of the new album. |
| September 17th, 2005 04:11 PM |
|
|
| the good |
I don't think this establishes much, to be honest. If your a musician then you know that what Keith described there is what typically happens with songwriting. It may be that Mick came in with more ideas than Keith did, but that doesn't mean the final products reflect Mick's creativity more than Keith's. This part says it all: (caps my emphasis)
"Mick comes in far more PREPARED than I do. I like to come in with the bare bones of an idea and see how it BUILDS. Mick prefers to come in pretty much knowing how it's supposed to go ... or THINKING he knows Ha! |
| September 17th, 2005 04:49 PM |
|
|
| Gazza |
I think its more significant that (caps my emphasis)
"THE ONES I LAID ON HIM" were "Rough Justice," "Infamy," and "This Place Is Empty" plus Keith's admission that Mick is more likely to come in with a song thats ready or almost ready to be recorded
No doubt each gives some significant input when collaborating on arrangements etc but that interview basically admits that 13 of the 16 songs on the album are at least primarily written by Mick.
As Keith says "you can tell". And those figures more or less backs up exactly how Mathijs broke the songwriting down several weeks ago. |
| September 17th, 2005 05:47 PM |
|
|
| IanBillen |
Response:
I don't see how anyone takes what Keith said as meaning, or implying in anyway that Mick wrote most of the songs.
Am I reading the same excerpt as you? Keith mentions two or three songs that Mick wrote solely for the most part. Period (if you want to call it a total of three. Remember Keith wrote the choras on one of those songs, which is like the most important part of a song). Keith also says he wrote three songs of his own that Mick went along with. Hence "Three that I laid on him". So last time I did the math that equals 3 to 3. Right?
As far as the rest go Keith talks as if they each contributed to the song writing process in their own way and talked as if Mick writes and brings in songs BEFORE they get to the studio where as Keith writes when they get into the studio. That is all he is saying. Mick could of brought in 300 songs and if they didn't use but three of them that is only three that Mick wrote solely on his own. If Keith added and changed things on the songs Micks brings in you can't call them all Mick songs either now can you? In my eyes and in reading I surely don't get out of this Keith is trying to say that Mick wrote the rest of the 13 songs single handidly for Crimoney's sake.
Again, until Keith or Mick says something to the effect of one or the other did most of the writing on this one, or something along the lines of one or the other really wrote alot of the material I think you are misinterpeting and assuming.
Ian |
| September 17th, 2005 06:00 PM |
|
|
| Mel Belli |
quote:
IanBillen wrote:
Response:
I don't see how anyone takes what Keith said as meaning, or implying in anyway that Mick wrote most of the songs.
Am I reading the same excerpt as you? Keith mentions two or three songs that Mick wrote solely for the most part. Period (if you want to call it a total of three. Remember Keith wrote the choras on one of those songs, which is like the most important part of a song). Keith also says he wrote three songs of his own that Mick went along with. Hence "Three that I laid on him". So last time I did the math that equals 3 to 3. Right?
As far as the rest go Keith talks as if they each contributed to the song writing process in their own way and talked as if Mick writes and brings in songs BEFORE they get to the studio where as Keith writes when they get into the studio. That is all he is saying. Mick could of brought in 300 songs and if they didn't use but three of them that is only three that Mick wrote solely on his own. If Keith added and changed things on the songs Micks brings in you can't call them all Mick songs either now can you? In my eyes and in reading I surely don't get out of this Keith is trying to say that Mick wrote the rest of the 13 songs single handidly for Crimoney's sake.
Again, until Keith or Mick says something to the effect of one or the other did most of the writing on this one, or something along the lines of one or the other really wrote alot of the material I think you are misinterpeting and assuming.
Ian
Yes. I think we read two different excerpts. |
| September 17th, 2005 06:40 PM |
|
|
| the good |
I agree that Mick probably came in with more ideas than Keith. But I'm not sure this means the album is more a reflection of Mick's input than Keith's. As far as Keith's comment "you can tell," I'm not so sure this is true. I mean, take Brown Sugar for instance. That song sounds SO much like Keith (and New Orleans  ). It sounds more like Keith than most Keith songs. But we all know that Mick wrote the song. Take another example, Ruby Tuesday. Who would have thought that song was all Keith?? Its got a Jagger melody all over it. But its Keith! I mean, I love both Mick and Keith, so I really don't care one way or the other. But I think before we can say this was primarily a Jagger album we would need a lot more detail about how the songs were written/recorded. |
| September 17th, 2005 07:46 PM |
|
|
| 72Tele |
I wouldn't want to take credit for many of theses songs either. |
| September 17th, 2005 08:02 PM |
|
|
| IanBillen |
-Keith Richards on who wrote what on the new album-
See the original post above
Question #1, 3rd line down:
"So it's kind of half and half"
How on earth can you possibly create a post with my name in it claiming that Keith basically says Mick does almost all the writing on this new album on this interview when he comes right out and says it is a half and half effort. If you don't see my point I am at a total loss.
Again: Keith is simply stating Mick comes in with material they work on where as Keith gets there and then he starts to write or see what happens with a number.
In short Keith says he comes in with an idea but it is very open to suggestion or alteration once he and Mick start working on things. Where as Mick thinks he already knows how the whole songs/songs should go that he brings in. Who knows the exact number of how many songs Keith changed that Mick brought in. Who knows exactly how many of Keiths ideas for a song that Mick changed around once they got into the studio together on them.
But as Keith says it all boils down to basically a 50-50 effort when you lo0k back at who wrote what. In the end Keith says it is "kind of half and half"
What more do you need than that?
Ian
[Edited by IanBillen] |
| September 17th, 2005 09:12 PM |
|
|
| Mel Belli |
Ian, Keith said in practically the same breath that "that one's more Mick than me, absolutely." The self-contradictory "half and half" is Keith blowing smoke. (He was talking specifically about "Let Me Down Slow" when he said that, by the way, not the entire album.)
There may be no persuading you here, but this should be obvious. Orwell said, "To see what is in front of one's nose needs a constant struggle." Ian, this is right in front of your nose.
There are 16 tracks on "ABB." Keith says he "laid" three songs on Mick. I think, in addition, there's a good possibility that Keith contributed significantly to "It Won't Take Long" and "She Saw Me Coming" -- but that's it.
Look, I don't know if you've ever tried to write a song, but fundamentally they consist of chords, lyrics and melody. If Mick writes all three of those components, I consider him to have written the song. What Keith calls "nuances and ideas" are like the "Happy Birthday" icing script on a cake that's already been baked. Mick has said as much in a previous interview, but declined (out of "politeness") to say so explicitly.
How do I know what Keith changed of Mick's? I know Keith better than Keith knows Keith. I can tell what he's played and written as sure as I can tell whether or not the sun is out.
But don't misunderstand: I think Keith did a great job on the album; the songs sound the way they do in large part because he played on them (rather than, say, the session yahoos Mick hired for "Goddess"). However, that *does not* mean he had anything to do with the conception of "Rain Fall Down," "Biggest Mistake," "Streets of Love," or whatever.
If you -- or anyone else -- are sure that Keith *must have* written *something* more than those five songs, by all means, let me know what it is. Give me a song title and a specific part: intro, verse chords, bridge, chorus melody - anything.
I'm open to suggestions.
[Edited by Mel Belli]
[Edited by Mel Belli] |
| September 17th, 2005 11:05 PM |
|
|
| the good |
[quote]
What Keith calls "nuances and ideas" are like the "Happy Birthday" icing script on a cake that's already been baked. Mick has said as much in a previous interview, but declined (out of "politeness") to say so explicitly
Mick has also said that he and Keith hadn't worked this closely in a long time. How can both versions be true?
[quote]
How do I know what Keith changed of Mick's? I know Keith better than Keith knows Keith. I can tell what he's played and written as sure as I can tell whether or not the sun is out.
Do you really want to stand by this statement?
[quote]
If you -- or anyone else -- are sure that Keith *must have* written *something* more than those five songs, by all means, let me know what it is. Give me a song title and a specific part: intro, verse chords, bridge, chorus melody - anything.
With respect, MR Belli, you know about as much as we do. Which is basically nothing about how individual songs were put together. If your namesake had tried to float arguments like this in court, the Stones would still be in jail for Altamont. 
|
| September 17th, 2005 11:24 PM |
|
|
| Mel Belli |
quote:
the good wrote:
[quote]
What Keith calls "nuances and ideas" are like the "Happy Birthday" icing script on a cake that's already been baked. Mick has said as much in a previous interview, but declined (out of "politeness") to say so explicitly
Mick has also said that he and Keith hadn't worked this closely in a long time. How can both versions be true?
----------->Well, first, I don't believe Mick has ever said that personally. Others have on his behalf, including Keith. And even if it's true -- I have a hard time believing they spent more time together than they did for "Voodoo Lounge," considering the timeline on which the tour and album were put together -- that doesn't mean Mick didn't go into those sessions with 11 or so songs more or less finished.
[quote]
How do I know what Keith changed of Mick's? I know Keith better than Keith knows Keith. I can tell what he's played and written as sure as I can tell whether or not the sun is out.
Do you really want to stand by this statement?
------------> Yup.
[quote]
If you -- or anyone else -- are sure that Keith *must have* written *something* more than those five songs, by all means, let me know what it is. Give me a song title and a specific part: intro, verse chords, bridge, chorus melody - anything.
With respect, MR Belli, you know about as much as we do. Which is basically nothing about how individual songs were put together. If your namesake had tried to float arguments like this in court, the Stones would still be in jail for Altamont.
-------------> Alan Passaro already beat that rap
[Edited by Mel Belli] |
| September 18th, 2005 12:47 AM |
|
|
| the good |
Well, I guess we agree to disagree MR Belli. But for what its worth, you have the best username on the board.
"Can I get you to pick up the phone?"
"I'm praticing, I'm going on before the Rolling Stones."
I had that line of his from gimme shelter on my answering machine for a while. Some people loved it, others thought it was really awful. It may be time to bring it back! |
| September 18th, 2005 01:45 AM |
|
|
| prism |
I think Keith means he came in with three complete songs, and he contributed lyrics amd music to other songs. They said they wrote most of the album together on Mick's couch. Wouldn't Mick say, "Keith do you have a line to add here?" I think he would. Is Neo Con a reggae song? Usually the reggae songs are Keith's. The lyrics are Mick's. |
| September 18th, 2005 02:27 AM |
|
|
| IanBillen |
Mel Bellie,
"How do I know what Keith changed of Mick's? I know Keith better than Keith knows Keith."
I think you may of over shot it here. Unless you are being sarcastic.
Mel Bellie. I realize it is right under my nose. It is in line three of the very first question in the interview. And Keith wasn't talking about "Let Me Down Slow".
He was generally speaking at this point. This is why he was mentioning other songs besides "Let Me Down Slow". What he is clearly saying is as far as basically self written entities they are three to three. And the rest they worked closely together on...."Kind of Half and Half".
Everything and everybody including Ron Wood, Don Was, and Charlie have stated would persuade anyone to think it was a very much a joint effort this album. Even Ron Wood put his hands together like they fit like a glove as he speaks of the two's endevors on this album. What does that tell you?
Why Gazza and yourself want so badly to believe Mick wrote most songs on ABB (even as many as 13 of 16 songs) single handidly is hard for me to understand?
Dudes,
They are telling you all this "working more closely", fitting like a glove gestures, "getting on so well"......writing face to face with two acoustic guitars saying "it goes like this" to eachother in an intimate setting, directly.
Even Keith says it was kind of half and half. And three they wrote apeice (for the most part but remember Keith gives Mick credit for Let Me Down Slow yet he claims he wrote the choras. Again, that is the possibly the most crucial part in the song).
No I don't write songs now that you ask. But really Mel Bellie this is totaly irrelevant in this particular setting. I am going by what The Rolling Stones have said directly about the writing process on ABB and the folks who were there on the album such as their producer.
With respect. Your no dummy and neither am I. We know that at least. However, I feel your argument is entirely speculative. My look at things have direct quotes from them telling us it was very, very, much a joint effort this particular time.
Ian
[Edited by IanBillen] |
| September 18th, 2005 04:10 AM |
|
|
| Bloozehound |
as much as i'd love to stick up for Keef all I had to hear was the first single, that atrocious SOL shit, and I instinctively knew this was going to be nothing more than mick jagger solo work in disguise
why else would that piece of fuck be shoved on us first
Keith so much as admits it in that interview, he's spent
the bottom line is, these dudes dont really give a shit about the albums anymore, that aint the bank, it's all about jumping jack flash and htw played live
|
| September 18th, 2005 05:52 AM |
|
|
| stonesmik |
Keith said: The ones I laid on him were "Rough Justice," "Infamy," and "This Place Is Empty. That's alright, Mick wouldn't want to sing the two latter ones anyway. But "Rough justice" is the best song on the album, so Keith's share is not too bad.
Also I think Mick may have written some of the songs (like "Rain fall down", "Sweet Neo Con", "Dangerous beauty", "Biggest mistake") all alone but I think there are also some songs that just developed in the studio resp. in Micks house in France.
Then Keith may have forgotten some of his contributions... can it be he wasn't more than involved in "It won't take long"? |
| September 18th, 2005 09:00 AM |
|
|
| Monkey Woman |
quote:
stonesmik wrote:
Then Keith may have forgotten some of his contributions... can it be he wasn't more than involved in "It won't take long"?
I'm wondering about that too. The song has a kind of "spatial" (for want of a better word) feel that I associate with classic Keith. Like in GS, Monkey Man... Plus, Keith soloes on LMDS, ONNYA and Dangerous Beauty.
So, AFAIK, that's at least 6 songs on 16 where he was "more than involved".
Anyway, my take on this issue is simple: if Mick wrote by himself, or with only minimal Keith contribution, most of the songs on the album, then more power to him!!!  I love ABB. (It's been in my CD player, playing at least once a day, since day of release.) RJ is great, and I love IWTL, LIND, DB, SSMC, ONNYA, RFD, BM (cool reggae), Keith's two songs, LWTCDI, and of course Back Of My Hand.
Think that Mick came up with BOMH!
Mick Jagger, old bluesman. Oh, and he's a hell of a rock star, too. |
| September 18th, 2005 10:48 AM |
|
|
| marko |
I wonder,what has happened to Keith?Has he run out of ideas,or isnīt just interested? |
| September 18th, 2005 11:39 AM |
|
|
| Taptrick |
Wow, there is a lot of rationalization and denial going on in some of these posts. Some alomost read, "i don't think that Keith admitting that Mick contributed more to the writing means Mick contributed to the writing." Face it, Mick contributed more for this album and Keith added some nice touches. For me, that's enough and I like the album.
|
| September 18th, 2005 11:40 AM |
|
|
| Mel Belli |
quote:
marko wrote:
I wonder,what has happened to Keith?Has he run out of ideas,or isnīt just interested?
I think it's complacency. The hunger to produce that comes with being young and at your creative prime is obviously long gone in Keith, and yet the big money keeps rolling in.
I take what he and Mick say at face value. Mick is self-driven and highly disciplined -- to the point that he seems like a cold fish -- whereas Keith is the happy bohemian, happy to be here, anywhere, Jah wonderful! Is it any wonder that, at their age, Mick is the more productive of the two? |
| September 18th, 2005 12:19 PM |
|
|
| Riffhard |
The album is a Mick album to a VERY large degree,and anyone that does not see that is blind as a fucking bat! Yes Ian,that means you. Good god man,you gotta turn everything into a fuckin' drawn out project. It reminds me of the line in Alice's Restaurant-"twenty seven eight-by-ten colour glossy
pictures with the circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each
one explaining what each one was to be used as evidence...."
Get over it! I mean for fuck's sake Keith has all but admitted that he had very little to do with the actual creation of the majority of the tunes on ABB,but for some reason you have to be contrarian about it. Are you sure you're not French?? There is not a bigger Keith fan on this board than I,but I will readily accept the fact that Mick is the one who drove the creative forces behind ABB. Unlike 72tele,I think the album is great,and I'm glad that Mick stuck the boot in because he has sparked a fire under Keith's ass,but to deny that it was Mick who lit the match is just plain stupid.
Riffy |
| September 18th, 2005 12:23 PM |
|
|
| Riffhard |
quote:
Mel Belli wrote:
I think it's complacency. The hunger to produce that comes with being young and at your creative prime is obviously long gone in Keith, and yet the big money keeps rolling in.
I take what he and Mick say at face value. Mick is self-driven and highly disciplined -- to the point that he seems like a cold fish -- whereas Keith is the happy bohemian, happy to be here, anywhere, Jah wonderful! Is it any wonder that, at their age, Mick is the more productive of the two?
Mel,that post nails it! That is exactly the difference between the two,and that captures the core reason that Keith is Keith,and Mick is Mick. Some on this board refuse to see what is so readily obvious to the rest of us.
Riffhard |
| September 18th, 2005 12:31 PM |
|
|
| marko |
Indeed,but it used to be KEITH who wanted to make albums in
the first place.
So,will there another stones album? |
| September 18th, 2005 12:32 PM |
|
|
| IanBillen |
quote:
Riffhard wrote:
The album is a Mick album to a VERY large degree,and anyone that does not see that is blind as a fucking bat! Yes Ian,that means you. Good god man,you gotta turn everything into a fuckin' drawn out project. It reminds me of the line in Alice's Restaurant-"twenty seven eight-by-ten colour glossy
pictures with the circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each
one explaining what each one was to be used as evidence...."
Get over it! I mean for fuck's sake Keith has all but admitted that he had very little to do with the actual creation of the majority of the tunes on ABB,but for some reason you have to be contrarian about it. Are you sure you're not French?? There is not a bigger Keith fan on this board than I,but I will readily accept the fact that Mick is the one who drove the creative forces behind ABB. Unlike 72tele,I think the album is great,and I'm glad that Mick stuck the boot in because he has sparked a fire under Keith's ass,but to deny that it was Mick who lit the match is just plain stupid.
____________________________________________________________________________
Riffhard,
I am not the one who started this thread, or conversation. Didn't you read the subject line? And you claim I am blind?
Secondly, the very reason we are here is to have conversations and debates. I try to keep mine dignified is the difference. Take some notes.
Ian
|
| September 18th, 2005 12:51 PM |
|
|
| sirmoonie |
quote:
Mel Belli wrote:
From no less a source than ... Keith Richards.
RICHARDS: ....... The ones I laid on him were "Rough Justice," "Infamy," and "This Place Is Empty." So it's kind of half and half. Mick comes in far more prepared than I do.
And those are the same two songs he's been re-writing for almost two decades now. Keith Richards is done. |
| September 18th, 2005 01:03 PM |
|
|
| Riffhard |
Ian,with all due respect,you do,in fact,debate everything. EVERYTHING! Even when it's obvious that Mick wrote the VAST majority of this album you will debate otherwise just for...? Hell,I don't even know why. It's almost funny really. Even Keith plainly states that Mick,in large part,was the creative force behind ABB,and not even that will change your mind,and admit the obvious. I was not trying to be rude to you,but your insistance that your right about everything,even when all the evidence is stacked against your argument,is,well,dumb.
Riffy |
| September 18th, 2005 01:49 PM |
|
|
| Zulu Fun Mix |
When you think about it, Ian, being wrong about this issue makes you right about another one. Back in February and March, when I was still just a lurker, I read you repeatedly insist, in the face of ferocious opposition, that "this album is basically done." Well, if Mick came in with most of the songs already written, you were right! Only production slowed them down. |
| September 18th, 2005 05:23 PM |
|
|
| Neocon |
Maybe I'm crazy, but I think Keith had a heavy hand in writing the following:
Rough Justice (words music)
Let me down slow (chorus)
It wont take long (the music sounds liek Keith)
She saw me coming (The music sounds like Keith)
This place is empty (words nad music)
Oh no not you again (I think Mick and Keith wrote it starting with just a phrase, the part apart from the choruse sound like Keith music)
Sweet Neocon (Sounds like Keith music)
Dangerous Beauty (sounds like Keith music)
Look what the Cat dragged in (the beginning sounds like paint it Black then it sounds like street fighting man)
Driving too fast (the out of your brain out of your mind stuff sounds like Keith music)
Infamy (sounds like Keith music and words)
He probably did something on "biggest Mistake" and "Back of My Hand"
He probably had little to do with "Streets of Love," which is a horrible song, "Rain fell down" (not horrible but not great), and "Laugh I Nearly died" which while not a great song, does give the Stones a different dimension.
Overall, I think Mick probably dominated the lyrics, at about 80%, but the music was probably more a 50 - 50 split.
|
| September 18th, 2005 05:26 PM |
|
|
| jcdesq |
Mick wrote the words and music to 90% of "A Bigger Bang." Keith is getting tired. |
| September 18th, 2005 05:49 PM |
|
|
| Neocon |
I don't know about 90%. Probably more that 50%. I'm interested on your take. Where do you disagree with me?
The ones I feel most certain about are "It won't take long," "She saw me coming," "Rough Justice," "Infamy" and "This Place is empty." Those 5 seem more Keith, then Then the out of time Chorus on "let me down Slow" is Keith's and it sort of dominates the song. |
|
