ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
A Bigger Bang World Tour 2005 - 2006
thanks thanks Mr. Jimmy
Rogers Centre, Toronto September 26, 2005
© 2005 Mr. Jimmy!
[ ROCKSOFF.ORG ] [ IORR NEWS ] [ SETLISTS 1962-2005 ] [ FORO EN ESPAÑOL ] [ BIT TORRENT TRACKER ] [ BIRTHDAY'S LIST ] [ MICK JAGGER ] [ KEITHFUCIUS ] [ CHARLIE WATTS ] [ RONNIE WOOD ] [ BRIAN JONES ] [ MICK TAYLOR ] [ BILL WYMAN ] [ IAN "STU" STEWART ] [ NICKY HOPKINS ] [ MERRY CLAYTON ] [ IAN 'MAC' McLAGAN ] [ LINKS ] [ PHOTOS ] [ JIMI HENDRIX ] [ TEMPLE ] [ GUESTBOOK ] [ ADMIN ]
CHAT ROOM aka The Fun HOUSE Rest rooms last days
ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
Register | Update Profile | F.A.Q. | Admin Control Panel

Topic: For Ian Billen: Corroboration of Mick's songwriting dominance... Return to archive Page: 1 2 3 4 5
September 18th, 2005 06:46 PM
gotdablouse One of the best threads here in a while, finally exposing Ian's contrarian nature to the masses ;-)

Seriously it does sound like Mick wrote most of the material, which is not much of a surprise since Keith told Uncut in 2003 that he'd written enough material over the years as it was. Strange thing is that VL was really a Keith album, rather dull if you ask me, but something must have snapped in him around that time. Just listen to "Infamy", this is just a rambling jam with a flangy sound that goes nowhere, who could call this a song in their right mind! You really have to be Keith and entitled by contract to tow cuts on the album.

The bad news on ABB is that not only did Keith not write much, he also didn't craft many lead guitar lines, other than maybe on ITWLong, and while Mick can write excellent tunes he certainly cannot craft guitar lines like Keith once did, that "spatial"/"jaunty" sound of his best work, say "Tumbling Dice". I listened to SW the other and while the songs are pretty boring compared to ABB's, the guitar was still there, now it's gone, probably for good too :-(
September 18th, 2005 08:18 PM
stonedinaustralia give keith a break i say

the classic 50's rockers aside he wrote the book on "rock and roll" - he's 60 plus years old - if he wants to kick-back in semi - retirement then that's his perogative

he has nothing left to prove and if he doesn't have much else to say and it bothers you then i would say that's more your problem than his

sure, as mel has suggested, he's probably lost his creative hunger and drive to a large degree but isn't that to be expected at his age and given his past achievments
September 18th, 2005 09:01 PM
the good Wow people. Piling one unfounded assumption on top of another is no way to establish what the truth is. We know very little about how these songs were put together. Until more is known about these recording sessions, it is simply silly to assume this is 90%, 80%, or 70% Mick Jagger's album.
September 18th, 2005 09:51 PM
Angiegirl
quote:
gotdablouse wrote:
One of the best threads here in a while, finally exposing Ian's contrarian nature to the masses ;-)

Seriously it does sound like Mick wrote most of the material, which is not much of a surprise since Keith told Uncut in 2003 that he'd written enough material over the years as it was. Strange thing is that VL was really a Keith album, rather dull if you ask me, but something must have snapped in him around that time. Just listen to "Infamy", this is just a rambling jam with a flangy sound that goes nowhere, who could call this a song in their right mind! You really have to be Keith and entitled by contract to tow cuts on the album.

The bad news on ABB is that not only did Keith not write much, he also didn't craft many lead guitar lines, other than maybe on ITWLong, and while Mick can write excellent tunes he certainly cannot craft guitar lines like Keith once did, that "spatial"/"jaunty" sound of his best work, say "Tumbling Dice". I listened to SW the other and while the songs are pretty boring compared to ABB's, the guitar was still there, now it's gone, probably for good too :-(


Thanks for writing my reply. Precisely my thoughts while reading this thread.

A more-Mick-than-Keith album is no bad thing in itself, as long as it resembles Wandering Spirit more than Primitive Cool. If Mick's the more creative workhorse around at this point, no problem, as the album turned out OK imo. But it could've been more than OK if Keith would have invested more into creating (better) guitar lines, and this goes for most songs on ABB, as Gotdablouse noted above. I clearly hear less Keith and a helluva lot more Mick on about every song. I miss the guitars on this record, quite simply. Luckily the drums sound better than they have ever sounded, which makes up for the lack of structure and rhythm here and there.

And stating that it's silly to judge that as we don't know it for sure (The Good) is silly. There are more than big fat clues around, and unequivocal quotes from the guys themselves. As well as reading body language and facial expressions (and interviewers' descriptions of those) of them in interviews, not to mention the audible evidence when you listen to ABB and compare it to other post-1983 albums.

Keith is more visible than oh say Woody though...
September 18th, 2005 10:18 PM
the good
quote:
Angiegirl wrote:

And stating that it's silly to judge that as we don't know it for sure (The Good) is silly. There are more than big fat clues around, and unequivocal quotes from the guys themselves. As well as reading body language and facial expressions (and interviewers' descriptions of those) of them in interviews, not to mention the audible evidence when you listen to ABB and compare it to other post-1983 albums.

Keith is more visible than oh say Woody though...



I just don't think there are big fat clues Angiegirl. Mick has contradicted himself in his interviews; implying in one that the album was basically his, and saying in others (and on television) that he hasn't worked this closely with Keith in years. Contrary to what others have said Keith stated in this interview, he said a Stones album is essentially a 50/50 effort. Reading body language and facial cues? Come on, Angie girl. Finally, I don't think that just listening to a song automatically clues you in as to who did what. I used the examples of Brown Sugar and Ruby Tuesday above to make this point. On this record, who the hell would have thought that Keith came up with the descending chorus in "Let me down real slow"? I bet if we put the question to all those who say you can just tell whether Mick or Keith wrote something, the vast majority of them would have said that only an idiot wouldn't know that Mick came up with that. They would have been confident in their position, incredulous that someone would offer a contrary view, and, most importantly, they would have been dead wrong.

September 18th, 2005 11:10 PM
Neocon Well I take it most folks are now willing to say Keith had a heavy hand in:

Rough Justice
Let Me down Slow
It Wont Take Long
This Place is empty
Infamy

So those songs aside, why would we not think he had a big role if not the initial ideas in:

She saw me Coming
Oh No Not You Again
Dangerous Beauty
Sweet NeoCon
Look What the Cat Dragged In
Driving Too Fast

Sure most of the lyrics are probably Mick's, but why say these are Mick dominated sounds. "Oh No Not You Again" and "Look What the Cat Dragged In" sound like 2 seperate songs fit together. Look what the Cat Dragged in sounds like "Paint it Black" fused with "Street Fighting Man" to some degree just as "Rough Justice" sounds like "Brown Sugar" + "Mixed Emotions."




September 18th, 2005 11:12 PM
IanBillen Got a Blouse wrote:
"One of the best threads here in a while, finally exposing Ian's contrarian nature to the masses ;-)"


Guys and Girls,

I do not want to go against the masses purposely. And in this case me, and just are few others have. I am surprised at the fact that so many agree that Mick wrote almost all (I have even seen 90% on this very thread). Give me a break. I go by what they say not what I think or want it to be.

I got alot of flack in the spring by folks disagreeing with me that the album was basically finished. Well by May as Mick said it was "85 % finished" and we never heard another word about it. I personally thought it was all done at that point and I did admit to Gazza that I was wrong about that. But I wasn't far terribly far off either. The boys just weren't all done as I had figured.

I certainly do not wish to go against the grain. I have been wrong before....and so have alot of folks.

However, I am still standing by the fact that

A. Keith said it was "kind of 50-50"

When Mick said the album was ":85 % finished" at the press conference I took that as 85 % finished.

Call me crazy, but I am not the one assuming here. Has Mick said anything about this? I don't read into anything I don't have to. Now if Keith would of blown the question off of said something to the effect like "well he wrote some and so did I" I would take a closer look at the situation.

What they have said being:Charlie, Ronnie, Don Was is that infact they were working more closely together on these songs than they have in a long long time. I have read this from them REPEATEDLY . Not just once but on sev eral different occasions and seperate interviews. Do you think they all decided to put up this big blanket of bullshit just so maybe, I dont know so I could be fooled into thinking this?

I am taking it for what it is.

Ian
[/quote]
September 18th, 2005 11:30 PM
the good Yes!! I feel the tide is turning in this thread. Its gettysburg, boys! Fix bayonets!
September 18th, 2005 11:42 PM
Angiegirl Lol, it's not like we're accusing them of child abuse or something similarly serious
September 18th, 2005 11:54 PM
Bloozehound Why would anyone waste time argueing with someone whose posted here for almost 2 yrs and

a) can't figure out how to use something as simple as the quote buttons properly


b) can't even tell who is on the cover of Tattoo You

but your right Ian, your always right

(snicker snicker)
September 19th, 2005 12:25 AM
HardKnoxDurtySox
quote:
the good wrote:

On this record, who the hell would have thought that Keith came up with the descending chorus in "Let me down real slow"? I bet if we put the question to all those who say you can just tell whether Mick or Keith wrote something, the vast majority of them would have said that only an idiot wouldn't know that Mick came up with that.



I like taking the optimistic approach myself and I really hope that Keith did come up with this chorus so I can tell myself he still "has it." However, I think that you and others are reading his quote in Guitar World all wrong. When he talked about coming up with the "chimes", I do believe that he meant simply that he played the descending guitar part in Mick's already composed chorus. If that is the case, it hardly qualifies as writing as much as it does arranging.
I know some have opined that Keith contributed to the writing of songs like "Dangerous Beauty" and "Cat." Once again, I hope you are right, but really, can anyone who knows Keith Richards' style of writing/playing make a good case for this? I don't think that this is a tough mystery to decipher. Mick definitly was the main creative force behind this record, for better or worse.
September 19th, 2005 12:46 AM
IanBillen
quote:
Bloozehound wrote:
Why would anyone waste time argueing with someone whose posted here for almost 2 yrs and

a) can't figure out how to use something as simple as the quote buttons properly


b) can't even tell who is on the cover of Tattoo You

but your right Ian, your always right

(snicker snicker)

____________________________________________________________________________

Bloozhound,

-Have another Genny Creamale buddy-

I was wrong about Tattoo You. I admit that just don't forget all the credible posts.


Ian

September 19th, 2005 01:57 AM
Lethargy
quote:
Mel Belli wrote:
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]



Mel, some people will deny even the plain English in front of them. Your analysis of the article is correct - any other interpretation is bizarre. And what's the big deal? Mick and Keith have picked up the slack for each other in various stages in the Stones' career. So why are some so defensive when faced with the reality that this one was slightly more Mick-influenced? Weird.

Keith made up with quality what he lacked in quantity here, by the way, as Rough Justice is the best track of the album.
September 19th, 2005 02:17 AM
IanBillen LOOK LOOK LOOK OPEN OPEN OPEN YOUR YOUR YOU FROGGIN FROGGIN FROGGIN EYES EYES EYES.....geez I fell like I am looking at a different interview here or something.

"Mick prefers to come in pretty much knowing how it's supposed to go ... or thinking he knows Ha! Mick's like that."

Now this remark. From the very same interview strongly suggests Keith changed alot of what material Mick brought to the table. Matter of fact it doesn't even strongly suggest, it is very blatent.

I suppose this accounts for nothing as well?

And I can't see what is in front of my face?

I am not defending anyone but I am just going by what people have said including, and not including Keith. Keith is blatently saying what Mick brought to the table he changed or added to. This accounts for writing. If you do not understand that indeed that is what Keith is saying here in that very same interview, in the very same response, I guess this conversation is over on my end.

Ian
September 19th, 2005 03:41 AM
Bloozehound
quote:
IanBillen wrote:
LOOK LOOK LOOK OPEN OPEN OPEN YOUR YOUR YOU FROGGIN FROGGIN FROGGIN EYES EYES EYES.....geez I fell like I am looking at a different interview here or something.

"Mick prefers to come in pretty much knowing how it's supposed to go ... or thinking he knows Ha! Mick's like that."

Now this remark. From the very same interview strongly suggests Keith changed alot of what material Mick brought to the table. Matter of fact it doesn't even strongly suggest, it is very blatent.





Lookee here Buffalo Billien, you take these things a little too literally

I get nothing more from Keith's remark than that he's generalizing about how his 40 plus year working relationship with Jagger usually pans out

I see nowhere in that quote where he specificaly states that he rewrote everything Jagger brought to the table for the ABB recording sessions

All anyone that knows ANYTHING about the Stones has to do is listen to ABB and its pretty blatently clear that it has an overwhelming abundance of Mick's "style" all over the friggin place, and a real lack of Keith's signatures, except, on a few of the 16 songs

The shift in dynamic is there dude, its real, and highly noticable or you'll wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place

Keith was asleep at the wheel this venture out, probably because he hadn't even picked-up a guitar in over a year, big difference between being an actual writing partner and just a hired gun, session player on the album

face it, ABB is Mick's album, with special cameos by Keith Richards

September 19th, 2005 04:48 AM
IanBillen [quote]Bloozehound wrote:



Lookee here Buffalo Billien, you take these things a little too literally

I get nothing more from Keith's remark than that he's generalizing about how his 40 plus year working relationship with Jagger usually pans out

I see nowhere in that quote where he specificaly states that he rewrote everything Jagger brought to the table for the ABB recording sessions

All anyone that knows ANYTHING about the Stones has to do is listen to ABB and its pretty blatently clear that it has an overwhelming abundance of Mick's "style" all over the friggin place, and a real lack of Keith's signatures, except, on a few of the 16 songs

The shift in dynamic is there dude, its real, and highly noticable or you'll wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place

Keith was asleep at the wheel this venture out, probably because he hadn't even picked-up a guitar in over a year, big difference between being an actual writing partner and just a hired gun, session player on the album

face it, ABB is Mick's album, with special cameos by Keith Richards


I agree Mick probably did a 60/40 album. However I feel Keith still had a good 40% here. I even think Keith added alot or changed things up on Mick based tunes here and there. Same holds true for Mick on Keith. In my eyes here is how the album sounds:
____________________________________________________________

I agree that a number of songs sound more like Mick wrote the better part of the songs:

-Dangerous Beauty
-Biggest Mistake
-Sweet Neocon
-Rain Fall Down
-Streets of Love
-Back of My Hand (although to me it sounded like they both did work on it but that's not what Keith said so it goes to Mick)

Those songs definately sound more Mick based.

____________________________________________________________

Now look at these tunes:

This Place is empty
Infamy
Rough Justice (I originally thought this was an even steven type deal but Keith says he wrote it so it goes to Keith)

These we are pretty sure Keith Wrote



___________________________________________________________

These songs seem to be more of a mix in which I see them both working them out. Seems both had influence on these:

-Oh No Not You Again
-It Won't Take Long
-Driving Too Fast
-Look what the Cat Dragged in
-She Saw Me Coming

____________________________________________________________

On Laugh I nearly died who knows, very bluesy yet seems like Micks Lyrics.

On Let Me Down Real Slow it sounds like they both worked on it about evenly.

It sounds more Mick sided sure but you just can't go by that. I beleive Keith had major input on at least 9 or 10 tunes in one way or the other. What do you want? In no Way shape or forum could I ever believe Mick wrote 13 out of the 16 single handidly. Come on now it does seem more Mick sided but Keith got alot more than that in him even on his laziest of albums Geez.

Ian

Ian
September 19th, 2005 05:17 AM
Gazza >On Laugh I nearly died who knows, very bluesy yet seems like Micks Lyrics

I dont think its that bluesy. Anyway, Mick is quite capable of writing something "very bluesy" every bit as much as Mick is ("Back of my hand" is DEFINITELY Mick. I doubt he'd be playing slide on it, otherwise)

LIND, next to SOL, is probably the one song on the album thats most obviously a Mick song. The personnel on it is a good clue. Mick's singing all of the vocals on it (including about 3 backing vocal tracks) which would indicate Keith's input was pretty minimal in terms of arrangements
September 19th, 2005 06:27 AM
IanBillen [quote]Gazza wrote:
>On Laugh I nearly died who knows, very bluesy yet seems like Micks Lyrics

I dont think its that bluesy. Anyway, Mick is quite capable of writing something "very bluesy" every bit as much as Mick is ("Back of my hand" is DEFINITELY Mick. I doubt he'd be playing slide on it, otherwise)

LIND, next to SOL, is probably the one song on the album thats most obviously a Mick song.

____________________________________________________________

Although you are very much entitled to your own opinion that is pure speculation just as mine. We never would think Keith wrote most of Heaven or Brown Sugar, either . BOMH isn't speculation. Keith said Mick wrote it.


"The personnel on it is a good clue. Mick's singing all of the vocals on it (including about 3 backing vocal tracks) which would indicate Keith's input was pretty minimal in terms of arrangements."

Gazza the personel used on a track has absolutely nothing to do with who wrote the lyrics or who wrote the musical parts whatsoever. Who sings vocals on a song can also mean little.
If Keith doesn't sound right in the mix, he doesn't sound right in the mix so they may have Mick do an over-dub instead. Remember this wasn't Dirty work where they were not in on every song together. They even mixed the thing side by side with Don Was and the mixing engineer. Nor was this B2B where they were in seperate studios. Mick and Keith worked very closely on these songs together entirely.

Ian
September 19th, 2005 07:14 AM
justforyou Some say Mick wrote BOMH, but what would the song be without Keith's chromatic guitar lines and his deep dark rhythm guitar ? They obviously worked it out together.

What I'd like is more Keith input in the lyrics, I love his sincere way of expression, supplementing Mick's poppy and scandalous lyrics.
September 19th, 2005 07:53 AM
Gazza
quote:
IanBillen wrote:
Although you are very much entitled to your own opinion that is pure speculation just as mine. We never would think Keith wrote most of Heaven or Brown Sugar, either


Theres plenty of people with more musical knowledge than you or I who can tell who wrote what based on styles, keys, etc. Generally, I've found their judgement to be spot on when the facts become available. And as Keith himself admits "you can tell". To the trained musical ear (which I admit isnt something I have more than some people do), it seems to be apparent and not idle speculation.

quote:
BOMH isn't speculation. Keith said Mick wrote it.


I know. Which proves the point I was making that just because something is generically bluesy it doesnt mean its a Keith song. Mick is equally as capable as composing something 'rootsy'. Remember when we first heard that song and people were speculating it was a Keith composition, and debating whether it was Keith or Woody on slide? Mathijs was the first person to state flat out that it sounded like neither and was probably Mick, which effectively implied that it was his song. Right on both counts.


quote:

Gazza the personel used on a track has absolutely nothing to do with who wrote the lyrics or who wrote the musical parts whatsoever. Who sings vocals on a song can also mean little.


au contraire. It means quite a lot in many cases. Both Mick and Keith have their own 'guys'. Matt Clifford's role on "Streets of love" would pretty much nail it as being a Mick song before any of us had heard a note of it. Likewise, Pierre de Beauport playing on a song, for example, would indicate its basically a Keith composition. And if Mick is playing a lot of guitar (and prominently at that, a la 'Back Of My Hand'), historically that would indicate that for the most part, its primarily his song. Pretty much all of the "Some Girls" album being a case in point. (I think Keith even said at the time that you can tell that the songs are Mick's because when he composed songs on guitar they were pretty much all in the same key)

September 19th, 2005 08:45 AM
Mel Belli
quote:
IanBillen wrote:
I agree Mick probably did a 60/40 album. However I feel Keith still had a good 40% here. I even think Keith added alot or changed things up on Mick based tunes here and there. Same holds true for Mick on Keith.



Here's a rule of thumb for who wrote what: Who -- Mick or Keith -- is playing the primary rhythm guitar on the track? If Keith is 'comping on a tune while Mick is driving it, chances are Mick wrote the song and Keith is merely playing along with it.

On "Rough Justice," "It Won't Take Long," "She Saw Me Coming," and "Infamy," Keith plays the main riff (Mathijs and I disagree about IWTL and SSMC - he thinks they're Mick as well). On all the rest, including "Oh, No Not You Again," "Driving Too Fast" and "Look What the Cat Dragged In," it's Mick.

Is this a hard and fast rule? No. This is where interpretive familiarity with Mick and Keith's respective styles comes into play. Not in a million years, for example, would Keith have come up with the chord progression for ONNYA. It's Mick all the way, which is why Keith mostly plays lead fills on the song.

Using "Brown Sugar" and "Ruby Tuesday" as examples of how it's hard to tell a Mick song from a Keith song is fine as far as it goes. Which is not far. In retrospect, it's obvious that Keith didn't write the BS riff -- there are too many chords in it! (Too many "piano" chords, too, like Eb and Ab, which Keith never uses on guitar.)

To an outsider, this thread must seem like hairsplitting. But it's really pretty simple...
September 19th, 2005 09:08 AM
Neocon I think it's silly to talk about the music to "Back of My Hand." That song belongs in the traditional files as far as music. Sort of a reworking of "Parachute Woman."

So your view is the Keith stuff is:

Rough Justice
Let Me Down Slow (Chorus)
It Wont Take Long
She Saw Me Coming
This Place is Emty
Infamy


So you don't think Keith did much on "Dangerous Beauty," "Neo-Con.".... ? Interesting.

September 19th, 2005 09:25 AM
Mel Belli
quote:
Neocon wrote:
I think it's silly to talk about the music to "Back of My Hand." That song belongs in the traditional files as far as music. Sort of a reworking of "Parachute Woman."

So your view is the Keith stuff is:

Rough Justice
Let Me Down Slow (Chorus)
It Wont Take Long
She Saw Me Coming
This Place is Emty
Infamy


So you don't think Keith did much on "Dangerous Beauty," "Neo-Con.".... ? Interesting.





Pretty much, yeah. "Neo-Con" sounds like it was written by Mick in five minutes ... "Dangerous Beauty" I'm not drop-dead sure about. All I hear is Keith playing his "You Got Me Rocking" riff very faintly underneath Mick's rhythm guitar during the verses, plus his solo.

Contrary to other Keith skeptics, I think he does play a lot of nice stuff on the album. The INXS thing he does on "Cat" is cool; so are the licks he does on "Rain Fall Down." He didn't write much for the album, but I think he was far from useless...


September 19th, 2005 09:52 AM
Neocon Oh yea, that opening riff on "Look What the Cat Dragged In," sounds great. You think that was Keith's or Micks? A real nice job there. You don't think "Oh No" and "look What the Cat Dragged In" sounds like they were both two songs strung together? That's just a feeling I have. Also, do you think Mick wrote all the words to "Driving too Fast." Again, I'm no expert, I just thought I was hearing different inputs on these. Could be Don was for all we know.

As for Keith not singing back up and all that, he doesn't on "Rough Justice," and Mick I believe plays guitar. I think Mick plays multiple instruments on Kieth stuff like Infamy. It makes the clues more confusing.

September 19th, 2005 09:56 AM
the good
quote:
Mel Belli wrote:


Using "Brown Sugar" and "Ruby Tuesday" as examples of how it's hard to tell a Mick song from a Keith song is fine as far as it goes. Which is not far. In retrospect, it's obvious that Keith didn't write the BS riff -- there are too many chords in it! (Too many "piano" chords, too, like Eb and Ab, which Keith never uses on guitar.)




The example is relevant because the same thing applies to tracks on ABB like Let me down real slow; nobody would have thought Keith came up with the idea for the descending chorus in that song.
September 19th, 2005 10:06 AM
Mel Belli
quote:
the good wrote:


The example is relevant because the same thing applies to tracks on ABB like Let me down real slow; nobody would have thought Keith came up with the idea for the descending chorus in that song.



As someone else mentioned earlier, Keith may have been referring only to what he played on guitar there, not the actual melody. It's hard to know exactly what the GW writer meant by "chimes"...
September 19th, 2005 10:14 AM
Mel Belli
quote:
Neocon wrote:
Oh yea, that opening riff on "Look What the Cat Dragged In," sounds great. You think that was Keith's or Micks? A real nice job there. You don't think "Oh No" and "look What the Cat Dragged In" sounds like they were both two songs strung together? That's just a feeling I have. Also, do you think Mick wrote all the words to "Driving too Fast." Again, I'm no expert, I just thought I was hearing different inputs on these. Could be Don was for all we know.

As for Keith not singing back up and all that, he doesn't on "Rough Justice," and Mick I believe plays guitar. I think Mick plays multiple instruments on Kieth stuff like Infamy. It makes the clues more confusing.





Don't worry about back-up singing or other sideline contributions. Just think rhythm guitar -- the thing that drives the song. Imagine you had a guitar and wanted to play an ABB song to a friend. What's the essential part that you'd have to play? Whoever's playing that part on the record probably wrote the song.

As for lyrics, I'm guessing Keith came up with "This Place Is Empty" and "Infamy" entirely on his own, and likely came up with the titles "Rough Justice" and "She Saw Me Coming." Everything else is Mick.
September 19th, 2005 10:41 AM
IanBillen Gazza,

There are so m any contradictions on this album where you may think it is for sure Keith or Mick and it turns out to be the opposite makes a strong case for the two really worked these songs out together. I don't know beans about writing music. I will be the first to admit it. I am fairly more knowledgable than the average Joe about recording it but certainly not not even close to the point of even thinking about being able to try and bragg a little about it. The only basis I have is who sounds like they wrote what. that went out the window with alot of folks when they got the real scoop on the writing of this album. I based it on what they have said in interviews and their producer.

Still if we take it for face value:

IWTL
RJ
SSMC
TPIE
Infamy

Without those songs we have an album that is not up to snuff. Short.

Without just three of these tunes it drastically takes the album down a notch being in RJ IWTL and SSMC all of which Mick does the lead vocals. Without these songs the album would be only decent. With these songs it pans out to be a great album. Without these songs we have a good Mick Jagger solo album like Wandering Spirit. With these songs we have the great album A Bigger bang is.

Point being without Keith this album would be below scale. The guy is as needed in this song writing relationship as ever. Not hardly all washed up as many are saying so here.

Ian
[Edited by IanBillen]
[Edited by IanBillen]
[Edited by IanBillen]
September 19th, 2005 11:56 AM
Gazza
quote:
IanBillen wrote:
Gazza,
Point being without Keith this album would be below scale. The guy is as needed in this song writing relationship as ever. Not hardly all washed up as many are saying so here.

Ian



I dont doubt and wont attempt to diminish Keith's musical contributions to what is a very fine album. Theres no doubt that even on many of the songs Mick may have primarily written himself that the contribution by Keith (and the rest of the band) were necessary in making the songs what they are.

I'll just agree to disagree on what Keith actually composed for this record out of the 16 songs that made the cut, and that backs up what I've thought for a long time that Keith's creativity as a writer is nowhere near what it used to be. It happens. Christ, even Dylan had writers block for 7 years in the 1990's.

Another way of looking at that maybe we havent thought of is to take into account the way this record was recorded. Keith may well have had plenty of ideas for songs and rough sketches and demos, whereas Mick (as Keith has admitted) is more likely to come to work with a song thats closer to being finished. It could well be that the circumstances in which this record was made (ie with Ronnie and Charlie absent at times) that they thought it more practical, with such a 'minimalist' line up, to work on songs that were ready to go as opposed to rough sketches of songs. Which therefore would tend to favour the type of way Mick writes.
September 19th, 2005 03:08 PM
the good
quote:
Mel Belli wrote:


As someone else mentioned earlier, Keith may have been referring only to what he played on guitar there, not the actual melody. It's hard to know exactly what the GW writer meant by "chimes"...



Well, Keith knows they were talking about songwriting at that point, so I don't think he was just referring to a guitar part.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5
Search for information in the wet page, the archives and this board:

PicoSearch
The Rolling Stones World Tour 2005 Rolling Stones Bigger Bang Tour 2005 2006 Rolling Stones Forum - Rolling Stones Message Board - Mick Jagger - Keith Richards - Brian Jones - Charlie Watts - Ian Stewart - Stu - Bill Wyman - Mick Taylor - Ronnie Wood - Ron Wood - Rolling Stones 2005 Tour - Farewell Tour - Rolling Stones: Onstage World Tour A Bigger Bang US Tour

NEW: SEARCH ZONE:
Search for goods, you'll find the impossible collector's item!!!
Enter artist an start searching using "Power Search" (RECOMMENDED)