[HN Gopher] The Rolling Stones' studio receipt for recording 'Wi...
___________________________________________________________________
The Rolling Stones' studio receipt for recording 'Wild Horses' and
'Brown Sugar'
Author : edward
Score : 67 points
Date : 2021-10-26 10:40 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (dangerousminds.net)
(TXT) w3m dump (dangerousminds.net)
| rmason wrote:
| The Aretha Franklin legend began in Muscle Shoals, it's where she
| got her first hit. But the recording session ended very badly
| while recording the second song.
|
| https://www.theguardian.com/music/2018/aug/19/aretha-frankli...
| atrn wrote:
| Same area, many of the same people, but at a different studio,
| FAME. MSS was a spin off due to various "fights". I did some
| recording, with Spooner and David Hood, at both places, a few
| years back. I really liked FAME, the room is fantastic but MSS
| has a great vibe.
| khazhoux wrote:
| Street View of the studio in Alabama. Impressive!
|
| https://goo.gl/maps/E7tzMPvnPRm7up1z5
| dakial1 wrote:
| That can't be it. Looks terrible
| altacc wrote:
| Music studios are often quite small and unimpressive from the
| outside. Inside they can be quite ratty & smelly. The value
| of a studio is often the people who work there and the
| equipment they have on site and that's the attraction for
| musicians.
| khazhoux wrote:
| That's it.
|
| Here's a Cher album named after the street address!
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3614_Jackson_Highway
| belter wrote:
| Awesome...Now will have to go next time in Alabama. They do tours
| of the Studio!
|
| https://muscleshoalssoundstudio.org/
|
| https://muscleshoalssoundstudio.org/pages/gallery
|
| Past artists using the Studio:
|
| - The Rolling Stones
|
| - Aretha Franklin
|
| - George Michael
|
| - Wilson Pickett
|
| - Willie Nelson
|
| - Lynyrd Skynyrd
|
| - Joe Cocker
|
| - Levon Helm
|
| - Paul Simon
|
| - Bob Seger
|
| - Rod Stewart
|
| - Tamiko Jones
|
| - Cat Stevens.
| a9h74j wrote:
| Also the early Boz Scaggs _Loan Me a Dime_ -- still being
| played live (at least in Boz Scaggs ' concerts) note perfect.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTFvAvsHC_Y
| olivermarks wrote:
| I love to visit famous studios, Stax in Memphis is amazing too.
|
| Lots of great London Studios in UK, like Basing Street Studios
| in Notting Hill (Now SARM)
|
| https://blackcablondon.net/2011/12/04/cabbies-curios-basing-...
|
| So much incredible music was recorded here!
| AlbertCory wrote:
| The interesting thing about the Muscle Shoals studio band is:
| everyone assumed from their sound that they had to be all
| black. In fact, they were all white, AFAIK.
| ratww wrote:
| The band is in the cover of this Cher album, that's khazhoux
| posted below (the title of the album is the address of the
| studio):
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3614_Jackson_Highway
| HarHarVeryFunny wrote:
| There's an interesting documentary about this Alabama studio
| "Muscle Shoals" available on Netflix & Amazon Prime. Seems an
| awful lot of good music came out of there. Combination of
| excellent studio musicians, production and maybe a magical local
| vibe.
| bsder wrote:
| > maybe a magical local vibe
|
| Translated to: nothing else to do.
|
| If I remember correctly, part of the reason for sending the
| Stones here was so that they couldn't misbehave quite as much
| and would actually finish their music.
| belter wrote:
| "OneMic Series - Muscle Shoals Sound Studio - Tour"
|
| https://youtu.be/hP4IwPgylzE
| lprubin wrote:
| If you like that type of documentary, I recommend another
| called "Standing in the Shadows of Motown" about the mostly
| anonymous studio musicians who played on a ridiculous number of
| Motown and Pop tracks from 1959 - 1972.
|
| "The Funk Brothers produced more hits than The Beatles, The
| Rolling Stones, The Beach Boys and Elvis Presley combined." [0]
|
| [0]
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_in_the_Shadows_of_Mot...
| chrisdhoover wrote:
| There a few interesting documentaries out. The Wrecking Crew
| about LA studio musicians. There's one on Brian Wilson. 20
| feet feet from stardom about back up singers. Laurel Canyon
| is interesting - its about the music scene there
| AlbertCory wrote:
| I've seen all of these and lots more. I'm just a music
| movie junkie, I guess. Can't wait for the Peter Jackson
| movie about The Beatles.
|
| The Laurel Canyon one with Jakob Dylan is outstanding.
| mgkimsal wrote:
| I wanted the Laurel Canyon one to be more interviews and
| less "recreate the music". I'm sure there was far more
| interview footage that would have been more interesting.
| AlbertCory wrote:
| YMMV. I actually liked seeing modern artists do the old
| songs.
| jbigelow76 wrote:
| Thank you, I upvoted you, lprubin, and belter, but I'll
| respond just here to not be repetitive. I come to HN for the
| tech but I stay for the etcetera :)
| HarHarVeryFunny wrote:
| Thanks - I'll check it out.
| lazyeye wrote:
| Fun fact: Australians might be interested to know "Brown Sugar"
| was written in a field near Canberra (outside Braidwood). Mick
| Jagger wrote it whilst on the film set for Ned Kelly.
| modriano wrote:
| > ...two of rock music's greatest songs...
|
| I don't often pay close attention to the lyrics in songs, but
| after hearing the Rolling Stones were pulling "Brown Sugar" from
| their set list [0] because of it's offensive lyrics, I read
| through the lyrics [1] and I was shocked to find that the song is
| about raping a young slave girl. I was shocked; the tone of the
| song is so incongruous with the horror of the crimes described in
| the lyrics.
|
| So, let's not call "Brown Sugar" one of rock music's greatest
| songs. Without the lyrics, it's a great bit of music, but it's
| completely tarnished by the lyrics.
|
| [0] https://people.com/music/rolling-stones-retire-brown-
| sugar-l... [1] https://genius.com/The-rolling-stones-brown-sugar-
| lyrics
| ace2358 wrote:
| Wow. Reading the lyrics is an intense experience. How could
| anyone ever have listened to that and not realised? I've never
| heard the song myself.
| Nitrolo wrote:
| To be fair it's quite difficult to make out the words when
| listening to the song. I must have heard it dozens of times
| and somehow I got the idea that "brown sugar" must have been
| some American slang I just didn't know for some drug, because
| I couldn't tell the words apart.
|
| Reading the lyrics now is... wow it's something.
| tamaharbor wrote:
| Yet somehow, it was OK for 50+ years.
| vmception wrote:
| The lyrics have often been brought up as bad.
|
| Jagger was 26 years old in Alabama making light of almost
| every serious issue of the time. Thats really not that
| absurd or different than what "okurrs" now. A reference to
| Cardi B's chart topping songs about personally being a
| scamming sex worker and general misandry.
| matthewmorgan wrote:
| "Brown Sugar" is one of rock music's greatest songs
| robbrown451 wrote:
| Technically only the first verse.
|
| And overall, it is about sex with black women, in a general
| sense. Two of Mick's black girlfriends each claim it is about
| them. I'd say the first verse is sort of a twisted sex fantasy.
| (and not just men indulge in rape fantasy/roleplay stuff)
|
| Obviously, Mick can relate to the slave trader in the first
| verse, in the sense that he had so many women who would let him
| do as he pleased with them, with zero regard for their
| enjoyment. I'm not saying he behaved that way, but he certainly
| could have, every day if he wanted to.
|
| Not really defending it, it's pretty awful to listen to. It
| certainly has an iconic guitar riff.
| vidanay wrote:
| According to https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/, $1,009.75 in
| 1969 is equivalent to $7,547.26 in 2021. My guess for the cost of
| recording two studio songs these days would be about an order of
| magnitude higher than that. (If you tell me it costs ~$40k to
| record a studio song, I would not be even slightly surprised.)
| kop316 wrote:
| A band I used to play with recorded/mixed five songs with a
| fairly reputable producer (he produced Avenged Sevenfold and
| several other national US acts), and the cost came out to be
| about $2,000/song (2015). We also had all of our songs fully
| written out, and everyone knew their part, so the procuder
| really only tweaked things. However, for the amount of time we
| got with the producer/studio, it seemed like a bargain to me.
|
| Recording/mixing just varies incredibly widely, and it varies
| by reputation of the producer, how much time, effort they put
| into your song, time in studio, things like that. That being
| said, ~$40k seems REALLY high to me (but I suppose if you are
| an act like the Rolling Stones, that is comparitively low).
| letitbeirie wrote:
| $2000/track sounds about right for that.
|
| I played with a regionally popular band around the same time
| and we were able to record a 5-song EP for $7500; it sounds
| like we got a similar level of attention from our producer
| (who had a few "oh yeah I know them" acts on his resume but
| none as popular as Avenged Sevenfold).
|
| $40k would be extortionate for what we got, but there are
| producers out there who are worth it. The Beatles got a good
| deal no matter what they paid George Martin.
| d883kd8 wrote:
| Sounds like a song costs about the same as a website
| wodenokoto wrote:
| That's 480usd/hour for studio time.
|
| Asking Google, a studio runs "30-200+" an hour, which doesn't
| say a lot, but says that todays prices easily undercut what The
| Rolling Stones chose to pay.
| rectang wrote:
| Then and now, studio _time_ varies wildly depending on
| production approach, arrangement, the number of takes required
| to get a "keeper", and the opinions of stakeholders who may
| wish to keep working. So estimates are hard to make.
|
| Many artists basically craft tracks in the studio these days.
| That really started in earnest with Sgt. Pepper's but it's much
| more common because of democratizing technological changes.
|
| You can spend unbounded amounts of time in the studio if you
| have the budget.
| S_A_P wrote:
| The answer is it depends. A lot of pre-production early
| recording can be done outside of the studio or at a home studio
| these days. Certain styles of music have little need for a
| 'professional' studio anymore. Unless you are an established
| and or well funded musician that depends on good playing and
| acoustics for your sound most records can be made on the cheap.
|
| In the Houston area where I live there are few studios that can
| and do record professional and big names. Most of those have
| rates around 150-250 bucks per hour. Recording to tape is
| rarely done anymore but these days 2" tape will run between
| 100-300 a reel. Depending on tape speed that will capture
| around 10-15 minutes of multi track music. If the band is tight
| and arrangements are worked out you can fit 2 songs on that.
|
| Big name producers can range from a percentage of pre-recoup
| sales, to a flat fee to a mix of both. In the early 2000s I
| think Dr Dre quoted a friends and family price as a flat fee of
| 50k per song. I think that would balloon to 150k for those
| outside his circle.
|
| Also note- this receipt for the Rolling Stones is _only_ for
| studio time and materials. That _may_ include engineering time
| and producer fees, but I would hazard a guess that it does not.
| I would also bet that Jimmy Miller(the producer of Sticky
| Fingers) had a separate fee so the 1000 bucks was not really
| the all in cost.
| dsizzle wrote:
| That was only the initial tracking too, not the mixing, and
| probably some of the overdubs.
| laumars wrote:
| I'd say the opposite is true. These days studio quality
| equipment is affordable so often when you pay for studio time
| what you're paying for is more the producers talent. So it
| really depends on the style of music and how prepared you are
| going into the studio / how much work the produce needs to do.
| I see can't the cost running into tens of thousands unless your
| basically using the studio time to compose your track.
| basisword wrote:
| On the other hand these days you can record a number 1 single
| at home with a laptop for pretty much no cost. That wasn't a
| possibility at all back then.
| vidanay wrote:
| Boston Boston is probably as close as you could get to that
| "back in the day".
| Turing_Machine wrote:
| Yep, but that was only really possible because Scholz was
| an MIT-trained engineer. Without that (or equivalent
| knowledge from other sources) it would have been tough.
|
| Nowadays you can buy the technology off the shelf.
| anamax wrote:
| And, it wasn't Scholz' first rodeo.
| jawilson2 wrote:
| McCartney? He probably had above-average home resources
| available though
| vidanay wrote:
| The band Boston and their debut album "Boston" is famous
| for having been recorded in Tom Scholz' basement. (Paul?)
| McCartney was not involved as far as I know.
| pstuart wrote:
| Referring to this:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCartney_(album) -- home
| recording in 1970.
| asdff wrote:
| Plenty of bands recorded their albums on cheap multitrack
| recorders in their garage.
| quesera wrote:
| Depends on the studio and staff (recording engineers, producer,
| etc). If either or both are famous -- instead of merely
| excellent -- you will pay a much higher rate.
|
| But the most important question is time. You can pay less than
| $1k for a full studio day with great equipment and great staff,
| but it adds up if you're slow, or your players are learning the
| song (or even writing it!) in the studio.
|
| And of course, you can do a _lot_ at home with a couple
| thousand dollars of hardware today.
| axegon_ wrote:
| I checked several calculators and it seems about right. To be
| completely honest I would have imagined that the price would
| have been much higher. Then again the Rolling Stones are at the
| top of my list so I am likely incredibly biased.
| mosdave wrote:
| Gimme Shelter (the film) has some good footage from these
| sessions.
| racl101 wrote:
| Even with inflation, seems pretty cheap in comparison to other
| stories you hear about groups being given hundreds of thousands
| of dollars upfront to record and then having these groups bitch
| about how they blew through their money and didn't get their
| record done OR they got their record done and it was shit and
| sold like shit.
|
| Sticky fingers has sold like ~20 million copies (last I checked)
| and is regarded as one of the best Rolling Stones albums and one
| of the best '70s albums altogether.
|
| Not bad ROI on two songs.
|
| Also, even though everyone seems to know 'Brown Sugar', 'Wild
| Horses', and 'Can't You Hear Me Knocking', IMHO: 'Sway' and
| 'Moonlight Mile' are some of the best songs but, honestly, I can
| always put this record on and listen to the whole thing start to
| finish. Certainly one of my faves while driving for long periods.
| boomboomsubban wrote:
| >Even with inflation, seems pretty cheap in comparison to other
| stories you hear about groups being given hundreds of thousands
| of dollars upfront to record and then having these groups bitch
| about how they blew through their money and didn't get their
| record done
|
| Those stories are about the total budget to produce an album,
| this is just the cost of the studio time and tapes. I'd bet the
| producer alone made more than $1000 for this song, and there
| would be many other people getting similar amounts.
| alfiedotwtf wrote:
| My menory is faded on this one, but IIRC there's an interview
| with 50 Cent where he talks about recording his first song.
| The producer wanted something like $50k but 50 Cent asked if
| instead he wanted royalties instead.
|
| The producer was undecided but eventually said royalties, and
| ended up getting millions
| at-fates-hands wrote:
| >> seems pretty cheap in comparison to other stories you hear
| about groups
|
| I remember hearing stories about how Nirvana recorded "Bleach"
| for $600. The story goes Chris Novoselic went to the founder of
| Sub Pop records and demanded they be under contract. The
| founder basically took a stock contract that he copied at the
| local library for .10 and had them sign it - giving them
| royalties on Bleach and Nevermind.
|
| Turns out when all the grunge bands were going to the big
| labels, those Nirvana royalties effectively allowed them to
| stay in business during their lean times.
|
| But you're right. I heard many, many stories of the hair bands
| getting signed, then going on a drug and spending binge and
| then never being able to complete their contractual obligations
| to the label.
| chiefalchemist wrote:
| They say the key to innovation (i.e., creativity) is scarcity.
| Low budget is obviously a form of scarcity.
|
| It certainly would be interesting to see a sample of albums,
| the studio bill, the marketing bill, and then the sales /
| revenue. I'm sure there are exceptions but I bet big bets
| correlate with big busts :)
| smoe wrote:
| To me it actually seem more on the higher end from todays
| perspective. Assuming that the "13 1/2 Studio Time" is in hours
| not days.
|
| What I have seen usually being quoted by professional studios
| in Switzerland is around $150-250 per hour for studio+engineer
| with discounts if you book days.
|
| But the recording sessions are only a small part of the process
| from writing to publication of music. And what really racks up
| the cost if one starts adding big names to any part of the
| production. If you just stick with professionals that charge
| for their services, not their brand, you can actually get great
| productions for not too much money.
| atrn wrote:
| Did some recording there a couple of years back. Not a bad room
| but the studio itself is mostly a museum these days and our
| engineer had to do a bit of work to get it functioning well
| enough for our purposes. In the area there are a number of great
| studios, e.g. Fame, Nutthouse but MSS is closer to a really,
| really good fried chicken place!
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-10-27 23:01 UTC)