Michael,
One of the best studio documents for the band was the tracking session for "Your Mind..." from Jan '68. In particular I was wondering what the deal was with Arthur's somewhat critical analysis of Johnny after a complete take of the song was performed and Arthur offered this (this may not be the exact wording but it is close):
"Echols, man, I don't get your trip. You played in one key for the whole song. You're the one who always says you can blow in the studio, with no one to bug you. You gotta blow man."
I just find it curious as the take that was done before this opinion sounds very similar to the recorded version. The whole band was rocking, and I thought Johnny gave a real blistering solo. Was this just "Arthur being Arthur" or was there a technicality that a non-musician/non-band member wouldn't pick up on?
For Michael: "Your Mind" banter
Moderator: The Freedom Man
- silentseason
- Senior Member
- Posts: 468
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 3:23 pm
For Michael: "Your Mind" banter
You set the scene
- MichaelStuart-Ware
- Senior Member
- Posts: 125
- Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 7:46 pm
Arthur being Arthur
Sorry for the slight delay getting back. Yes, that was Arthur being Arthur. There was nothing wrong with the way Johnny was playing. His solo was indeed blistering.
Strange isn't it, that we (yes, I've done it too) sometimes feel the need to conjure up an explanation for Arthur's occasional forays into the unexplainable by characterizing it simply as Arthur just being Arthur?
So why do we do it? Because we want to like the whole Arthur. He gave us so much joy and pleasure, his insight was so gargantuan, and his talent so profound, we don't want to think he could do something selfish, or arrogant or mean. Besides, it doesn't make any sense does it? How can the two opposing entities coexist so peacefully in the same human being?
You know...I hear Einstein was a lousy cook. Seriously. Couldn't bake a potato.
Strange isn't it, that we (yes, I've done it too) sometimes feel the need to conjure up an explanation for Arthur's occasional forays into the unexplainable by characterizing it simply as Arthur just being Arthur?
So why do we do it? Because we want to like the whole Arthur. He gave us so much joy and pleasure, his insight was so gargantuan, and his talent so profound, we don't want to think he could do something selfish, or arrogant or mean. Besides, it doesn't make any sense does it? How can the two opposing entities coexist so peacefully in the same human being?
You know...I hear Einstein was a lousy cook. Seriously. Couldn't bake a potato.
- jamestkirk
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5816
- Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 9:11 pm
- Location: The Music Of My Mind
Funny! I bet Einstein knew the science of baking it though! He likely had a theory on why his potatoes wouldn't bake.
Hey Michael....did Arthur ever berate or question your drumming during a particular tracking session, and did you shrug it off, as usual, as "that's just Arthur"?
Hey Michael....did Arthur ever berate or question your drumming during a particular tracking session, and did you shrug it off, as usual, as "that's just Arthur"?
"After silence, that which comes nearest to expressing the inexpressible is music".
-Aldous Huxley
-Aldous Huxley
- MichaelStuart-Ware
- Senior Member
- Posts: 125
- Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 7:46 pm