Jump to content

You must surely like at least ONE song of theirs


Recommended Posts

I don't get why The Doors felt in either necessary to have a bass guitarist on the records or not have bass guitarist when they played live. IMO they should have picked one instrumental line-up and stuck with it both on stage and in the studio.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, Lord Sausage said:

There's great bass playing all over The Doors records.

I don't know for sure but wasn't it their producer who made them have it on record. Guess he couldn't make them live!

I don’t think anyone made them not have a bass player. In the studio they used several session bass players including The Wrecking Crew’s Larry Knechtel but felt that the band never quite worked with a bass player. I guess having a drummer that preferred Jazz, a classically trained keyboard player and a singer that really wanted to be a Poet was complicated enough.

Edit: You May be correct though. I know on one album there were a bunch of other instruments introduced to make a more orchestral arrangement that not all the band were happy about.

Edited by tegs07
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 29/05/2021 at 09:12, Barking Spiders said:

I can't abide their twee mop top period but once they discovered the joys of LSD etc, grew their hair on their heads and faces they produced a wide variety of tunes. For me more hits than misses.

The thing with the Beatles is that the best songs were not  the singles and the best Albums were Revolver and Rubber Soul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Chienmortbb said:

The thing with the Beatles is that the best songs were not  the singles and the best Albums were Revolver and Rubber Soul.

In your opinion. I happen to agree though. I’m not much of a Beatles fan but most of the songs I do like are on those albums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, tegs07 said:

I don’t think anyone made them not have a bass player. In the studio they used several session bass players including The Wrecking Crew’s Larry Knechtel but felt that the band never quite worked with a bass player. I guess having a drummer that preferred Jazz, a classically trained keyboard player and a singer that really wanted to be a Poet was complicated enough.

Edit: You May be correct though. I know on one album there were a bunch of other instruments introduced to make a more orchestral arrangement that not all the band were happy about.

The bass player on many Doors songs was Doug Lubhan, bassist for Elektra stablemates Clear LIght. More at https://ultimateclassicrock.com/doors-bass-players/

The thing that made The DOORS IMHO was that they had such varied musical backgrounds. I saw them only once, at the 1970 Isle Of White Festival but can't remember if they had a bassist then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BigRedX said:

I don't get why The Doors felt in either necessary to have a bass guitarist on the records or not have bass guitarist when they played live. IMO they should have picked one instrumental line-up and stuck with it both on stage and in the studio.

That's a very odd notion, to me. 'Variable Geometry' doesn't seem strange to me, and many bands, groups, orchestras and 'solo' artists do this all the time. Nothing's set in stone; once a performance is over, the next can be radically different, if so inspired. Still, whatever. Strange Days, eh..? :friends:

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Still on the Doors....... in some cases, for sure the first album, (and for sure not for Jerry Scheff )the bassist simply doubled the keyboard bass.

IMO this gave a great feel to the first Album...... strange repetitive  left-hand lines going on which a real bass player probably would not have played.

Edited by Nail Soup
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dad3353 said:

That's a very odd notion, to me. 'Variable Geometry' doesn't seem strange to me, and many bands, groups, orchestras and 'solo' artists do this all the time. Nothing's set in stone; once a performance is over, the next can be radically different, if so inspired. Still, whatever. Strange Days, eh..? :friends:

I suppose it depends what you want out of live performance of the studio recordings.

Myself, I'm very much a believer that, for rock and pop music, the arrangement is an integral part of the composition and to deviate significantly from the known recorded version can lead to audience disappointment. That's certainly been my experience with some bands - particularly Eurhythmics and Propaganda, who elected to replace the electronic perfection of their albums with a rather lack-lustre "full band experience" and were all the less impressive for it. 

If you want to try something different rather than subject your audience to massively altered versions of the songs they already love, then write some new ones in the appropriate style as Goldfrapp did when progressing from Felt Mountain to Black Cherry and play those instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dad3353 said:

That's a very odd notion, to me. 'Variable Geometry' doesn't seem strange to me, and many bands, groups, orchestras and 'solo' artists do this all the time. Nothing's set in stone; once a performance is over, the next can be radically different, if so inspired. Still, whatever. Strange Days, eh..? :friends:

Strange Days!

 

Nice one Centurion! Like it, like it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BigRedX said:

I suppose it depends what you want out of live performance of the studio recordings...

I can listen to the studio recordings at home, in excellent conditions. I like to see a group perform, not just play what I already know. It can be risky, naturally, but, in balance, and for the genre of music I went to see 'back in the day', I was but rarely disappointed (I'm excluding The Edgar Broughton Band, naturally, as they were never good, either 'live' or on disk -_- ...). The very different versions of the Floyd sessions, spontaneous improvisations from Fairport Convention, the free inspirations of Jefferson Airplane, various moutures of Frank Zappa's line-up, and many more, painted a much wider palette than any collection of disks could have done. It could be mentioned that, at the time, PA systems were well below even the domestic hifi set-ups I had at home, and listening conditions were seldom optimum comfort. Classical concerts were much better (no PA, so...), but I would still prefer to hear what the conductor and orchestra were up to that evening than to hear the version I had at home. Different strokes'n all... B|

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Chienmortbb said:

The thing with the Beatles is that the best songs were not  the singles and the best Albums were Revolver and Rubber Soul.

I'm a big fan of the Beatles but can't fault you on that comment

Pink Floyd - Wish You were here 

Chis De Burgh - A Spaceman Came Travelling

Blur - Song 2

Elton John - Rocket Man

Stevie Wonder - Signed Sealed Delivered I'm Yours

Queen - Sheer Heart Attack

Radiohead -Creep

Ronan Keating - When You Say Nothing at all (strangely enough, my partner doesn't like it 😂)

Eric Clapton (apart from Cream) -  Layla

Genesis - You Know What I Like 

ELP - Fanfare For the Common Man

 

Edited by PaulWarning
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know there are many Joy Division fans on here but try as hard as I did, I couldn't get my head round Ian Curtis' morose vocals with the exception of "Love'll tear us apart" which wasn't their typical repertoire anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SH73 said:

He was a lefty?

Dunno, but most accomplished keyboard / piano players seem to be very adept with the left hand doing complex stuff, I guess it comes with the territory... The very best I can do LH wise on the Jo-anna is go donk-dink- donk-dink in octaves.. ( on the white keys natch. ! )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, SH73 said:

He was a lefty?

No, just a keys player. Most folk can do plenty with either hand, really, if they decide to just 'do it'. There are few left-handed pianos, so keys players, whether righty or lefty, just do the work and get the results. Same as sax players, cellists, flautists... In fact most musicians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Doors should have had only the same four musicians onstage as on the records, no extra hired hands allowed. Verboten.

Also they should have all worn the same outfits onstage that they wore when they recorded their albums.

And they should have been forced to eat three meals a day, every day, at the same time each day. 

A bit more discipline and adherence to the rules and they might have been more successful, who knows?

And definitely 100% when Jim Morrison died the rest of the band should have replaced him with Elvis Presley. Personally I can’t stand Elvis but I think it would have been funny as f*** to hear him singing “L.A. Woman” or “Break On Through” or whatever. 

These painkillers are unusually strong, by the way. 

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dad3353 said:

No, just a keys player. Most folk can do plenty with either hand, really, if they decide to just 'do it'. There are few left-handed pianos, so keys players, whether righty or lefty, just do the work and get the results. Same as sax players, cellists, flautists... In fact most musicians.

Bagpipes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I generally don't like Rolling Stones. I don't think they're bad, just can't get excited about their music. There's just two exception, Street Fighting Man and Paint It Black. I think both of them are fantastic songs.

Nirvana are another band I feel that way about. Most of it I could take or leave but Love Buzz and Territorial Pissings are brilliant. Maybe it's because I never felt their music really represented grunge that well and that Tad, Mudhoney and Melvins deserved a lot of the recognition Nirvana got.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SteveXFR said:

 

Nirvana are another band I feel that way about. Most of it I could take or leave but Love Buzz and Territorial Pissings are brilliant. Maybe it's because I never felt their music really represented grunge that well and that Tad, Mudhoney and Melvins deserved a lot of the recognition Nirvana got.

 

I'd rate Mudhoney over Nirvana any day of the week.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, SteveXFR said:

I generally don't like Rolling Stones. I don't think they're bad, just can't get excited about their music. There's just two exception, Street Fighting Man and Paint It Black. I think both of them are fantastic songs.

Nirvana are another band I feel that way about. Most of it I could take or leave but Love Buzz and Territorial Pissings are brilliant. Maybe it's because I never felt their music really represented grunge that well and that Tad, Mudhoney and Melvins deserved a lot of the recognition Nirvana got.

 

I think Nirvana deserve the kudos that came their way but Alice in Chains were/are numero uno

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...