Rolling Stones - Exile on Main St. box set with unreleased songs

No, I just hope that it's only for that one song, & not any of the others. If half of the songs were to feature modern overdubbed vocals however, I would certainly pass, yes. Leave well enough alone. If the vintage vocals can't be used (or don't exist), just give me the instrumental, then. At least then it would be honest, & not misleading.

 

What's dishonest about Jagger recording a new vocal, as long as it is clearly labelled as such? From what I understand, there are a lot of Stones tracks in the vault for which Jagger did not record vocals. I think he recorded a "new" vocal for "Slave" when they dug that song out of the vault for Tattoo You. That worked for me then, and, again, I'd rather hear songs with vocals than without. These are bonus tracks - I don't see how they sully the integrity of the original Exile lp.

 

And that's my point. It will NOT be labeled as such, on the outside of the packaging anyway, for potential buyers. It is misleading & dishonest. Sure, it will say it on the inside liner notes, after you've already bought & opened the damned thing.

It sounds like you & I just have different tastes, that's all. Myself, I detest historical revisionism. You're a little more open to it, & that's ok, too. But I have zero interest in hearing someone in his mid 60's try to spruce up an old track from when he was in his early 30's. To me, it's just not "real" anymore, & means nothing. If he's not happy with this particular track exactly as it was recorded nearly 40 years ago, then don't release it.
Personally, I just don't see it as any big favor giving us a frankenstein-ized version of it.

 

The target audience for this set is us, people who are talking about this now on-line. Anyone who buys it will know what they're getting before it hits the shelves. Casual Stones fans aren't going to throw down $100 for this, only to feel ripped off when they open the shrink wrap and discover that Mick recorded one new vocal track.

 

Eh, I don't know about that... the Stones have a LARGE audience. Surely all of them aren't nearly as in touch with such things as we are all.

(For the record, I agree with Driver 8 re: new vocals being okay with me for bonus tracks. What I'm wondering is if they replaced a bad or incomplete old vocal, or are all new, or new lyrics or what. )

 

And if the prospect of new Mick vocals on old tracks gets you going, how about the rumor being discussed over at iorr.org that Jagger has enlisted Mick Taylor to overdub some guitar on the unreleased tracks!? It's probably untrue, but you never know....

 

Careful....you're gonna make somebody's head explode!!!

 

Not necesarily. You honestly feel that everyone who buys this will know that there is a modern vocal overdub on at least one of the tracks? Up until 4 years ago, when I joined this forum, I didn't know squat about what was on new releases. I read about them in a magazine review, or heard about it coming out from a friend, went to the store, & bought it. After listening, & only after listening, did I know exactly what I had on my hands. Believe it or not, there are still people who do this. I was record shopping with a friend of mine the other day who found a copy of The Beatles' "Yellow Submarine" SONGtrack CD for a few bucks. He said he'd been looking for a copy, so he bought it. I'm reasonably certain that he has absolutely no idea that those songs are remixed. This DOES still happen, but maybe a little less frequently than in the past, I'll give you that.

 

Exactly.

 

This concept I cannot grasp. Why do you feel that it's "ok" for the bonus tracks? I would like to think that a Stones fan already has a decent sounding version of the proper album, & this new one surely ain't gonna sound any better, mastering-wise. The ONLY reason I'd be buying this is FOR the bonus tracks, & if they are f'd with, modern over-dubbed creations, then what exactly is the point of it all?

 

I don't know where you're getting this "on at least one of the tracks" or "half the tracks will feature new vocals" stuff. According to wiseblood's post above, Don Was told him that one track has received a new Jagger vocal. If that one track bothers you that much, I'm sure you can press the "skip" button on your CD player or burn a CD-R without it.

With regard to your second point about your friend buying Yellow Submarine Songtrack, if he's not obsessive enough of a fan to know that the songs have been remixed, it's sort of like the proverbial tree falling in the forest that no one hears, isn't it? A normal person doesn't care whether or not the click caused by John Lennon's pickup selector switch has been digitally edited out of "I Want You" on the Abbey Road remaster. Nor do they care whether or not "Eleanor Rigby" on the Yellow Submarine Songtrack is in mono, stereo, Duophonic, George Martin's special mix for the Dutch market, or 5.1. Nor do they care to spend $100+ to hear outtakes from Exile on Main Street. No one is going to buy this and get "ripped off" because Jagger recorded new vocals on one song. Either they will be a super-fan who knows exactly what they're getting before it comes out, or a super-rich casual fan who couldn't care less whether Jagger recorded some new vocals or not.

 

Technically one could argue that Tattoo You was a whole album of leftover tracks that were "f''d with, modern over-dubbed creations" or for that matter Exile itself contained leftover tracks from LIB and SF. Yes, there are decades involved instead of a few years but it's still old tracks with new work on them.

 

Well, not to speak for Driver 8, but to me the bonus tracks are, you know, just a bonus. I'll take what I can get, you know? I'm not gonna grouse too much about whatever they do to it.

Now, if they wanted to re-do previously released stuff/overdub onto it, or whatever, THAT would bother me, but with bonus tracks, I just feel like I'm looking a gift horse in the mouth by letting that stuff bother me.

 

I think the point of it is that the Stones were known for recording full instrumental tracks for which Jagger either didn't write words or didn't record a vocal at the time. I think I've read somewhere that part of the reason for this was an attempt to beat the bootleggers. Again, I think that when the Stones recorded Tattoo You, Mick recorded then-new vocals for tracks from as far back as '72, such as "Waiting on a Friend," which dated from the Goat's Head Soup sessions. If I'm wrong about this, and the Stones recorded a new backing track for "Waiting on a Friend" in 1980/81, someone please correct me. But I know I've read that Mick Taylor threatened to sue because his original playing appeared on at least two Tattoo You tracks. So the Stones have done this before. In the past, I've been uneasy about Tattoo You's status as the "outtakes album," so I understand where you're coming from. But from the perspective of 2010, I'm glad we got the song "Slave," which I believe was an outtake from Black and Blue. Obviously Mick is a lot older than now than he was in '81, but if "Slave" had never been released on Tattoo You, I would want him to record a new vocal for it for a deluxe edition of Black and Blue, if the reissue program ever got to that record. Obviously, where there are full vintage vocal performances such as "Claudine" from Emotional Rescue, I'd prefer to hear the original performance. But if there is no usable original performance, I'll take Mick recording a new one now. Like I said above, no one's forcing you to listen to every bonus track on any deluxe edition.

 

That is a very good point.

 

Totally agree. As a fan, I want to hear the outtakes in their natural state. We know they are outtakes, we don't need them "finished." Also, 9 to 11 unreleased tracks is interesting, but how many of them will have been tweaked by Mick, Keith and Mick Taylor (rumored)? Anyone think there will be anything from Gram Parsons on it?

Also, who wouldn't mind a third disc of live material from '72? It won't happen....

 

True, but the reworked tracks for this upcoming deluxe edition aren't being passed off as "new" tracks for a new studio album. This is an archival release to celebrate the history of a classic album, leave the outtakes alone so the fans can have a historically accurate experience.

 

I'd suspect they might be able to head off controversy if they elect to include both the original untampered track(s?) *and* the versions with recent overdubs.

 

I know my brain operates on a different wavelength from that of most other people, but it seems to me that it is more dishonest to pass off nine or ten outtakes as a "new" studio album than to include them as bonus tracks, clearly labelled as such, on a deluxe reissue of an old studio album.

If you want a "historically accurate experience," I'd suggest you just pull your original vinyl pressing of Exile off the shelf. That's the only historically accurate experience of the album.

 

And if one wants outtakes that have not been tampered with at all, then you are also in luck, there are discs out there chock full of hissy demos and outtakes missing major instrumental sections of the material, some even missing vocals, so that should please a fan!

 

So, you're saying the Exile CD on Virgin from a few years back had new overdubs?

 

No, I'm saying that when this album was released in 1972, CDs did not yet exist.

 

Does anyone know which tracks were leftovers from LIB and SF?

Evan

 

I've heard some of those discs. I'd love to see the reaction if the Stones just dumped the raw instrumental tracks from the sessions as the bonus tracks on this reissue.

 

What we're talking about here IS a huge difference though, as you've already mentioned.