Hail and well met, fellow seekers of the weird, the unusual and the dirt-cheap. Today’s post is a quick one, as it restates a case we discussed in the form of “Walkin’ the Dog” many months ago. This time, we’re going to take a closer look at a song from the Stones’ 12×5 album — “It’s All Over Now”. I’ve got this song in my crosshairs as a result of finding a copy of the original, done by The Valentinos, at a flea market this weekend. One spin of the original caused me to take a small sip of brandy, stroke my chin thoughtfully, and wonder: Didn’t anybody back in 1965 or whenever the Stones released this turd point out that the original was a damn sight better than the Stones’ cover?!
Seriously, are there any Townspeople who wouldn’t prefer this:
“It’s All Over Now”, The Valentinos
to this?:
(Yes, yes, I know; that Stones “video” is a helluva way to present my case in an unbiased fashion. It was actually the only studio version of the song I could find online — and if anything, it serves to help illustrate the central point of my case!)
YES, I prefer the Stones version! Although it’s not among my favorites on one of the greatest Greatest Hits albums ever, Big Hits (The High Tide and the Green Grass), it’s a no-nonsense blast of pimply-faced braggadoccio. The original version, although “cool” on many levels, is not as focused: the xylophone part gets old fast, the proto-John “Drumbo” French drum fills suck the focus away from what little the song has to offer, and the vocals are too goofy. Instead of getting a second-rate, Brian Jones Stones single, you get a Rufus Thomas routine. Good find, HBV, but we’re talkin’ about music. Townspeople, I welcome your agreement!
I’ll take The Stones too. BIG points off for The Valentinos for playing, what at least sounds like, a banjo. I can imagine this being played on Disneyland’s Main Street, mid-sixties if they had allowed negroes in.
Aside from some blues from this same period, not much can match the early Stones for shooting and smearing their dank sex all over a song.
Good fucking grief. The last time we had a conversation along these lines, Townsman Saturnismine was first to assert that the Stones’ version of the tune in question was best because it captured its dark, satanic psycho-sexual overtones, or something. I had to laugh then, and I’m laughing now. If you hear “dank sex” in their Romper Room whang-a-lang version of this hicksville ditty, all I can say is… well, I just don’t know what to say. Do we have any therapists in the Hall? Seriously, do we?
BTW, HBV, Mad Props for use of one of those weird animated videos! I’ve used them in the past with great satisfaction and smug superiority. It feels good to dismiss an act by use of one of these clips, doesn’t it? Nevertheless, prepare yourself for a spanking over this issue. Despite the fact that I welcome the support of Sammy and Sat, don’t try to tie me into Sat’s hyperbole or Sammy’s sex-obsessed take on the world. I’m just callin’ ’em as I see ’em, ie, the right way. Can I get a witness?
A-Dogg, have you compared these two versions yet? I think Hrrundi will respect your likely agreement with me, Sammy, and Saturnismine.
Forget the Velvet Foghorn! I wanna hear from BigSteve and Massimo — I feel certain they’ll join me on Team Clarity of Vision and Integrity.
You don’t care about my opinion anymore, Hrrundi? (sniff sniff)
I’ve just listened to both versions. The original is OK for that sort of thing. i can see why you would like it, HVB 🙂 🙂
Seriously, the orgianl is OK. I like the tuba bass but I gotta go with the Stones on this one. I think last time I went with the original version of “Walkin the Dog”
Oh right, no one hears the dank sex in that guitar? That voice? C’mon, this is a perfect soundtrack to a Bukkake film. Sex obsessed indeed! If I had both hands available to type right now I’d really let you have it!
Mockcarr, surely you can set your boy straight.
H-Run-D, I gotta side slightly with Mod here. I like the Stones version more. The guitar line that sounds like a chicken, the whoomp of the bass and kick drum, the faux country vocalizing – especially how when the Stones try to add harmonies that they sound like a bunch of kids, and the reverby mush of the pseudo-power chording at the end. Just too much to like.
There’s a lot to like in the Valentinos original,the rubbery bass/tuba thing, the subtle counterpoint of the guitar, a vibe or two lurking. It’s just a little too chunky sounding for me to give it preference.
Oh, we agree more than you know, Mockcarr. Thanks. I hope our friend finds your comments helpful.
HVB, that video is really funny. Is that The Sims? I like how the drummer is pretty much Bizarro Charlie Watts, flailing away like a madman back there. Thanks, it was funny.
You’re totally wrong, though. the Stones version is far cooler, sexier and misogynistic than The Valentino’s. A lot of it is the cool swing of Charlie’s drumming. He lost that swing on that song, in particular on the 97/98 tours. Here’s a clip from 95 where you can see what I’m saying, but it got much worse; to the point where I think the beat sounds more like the Sesame Street Theme Song than anything remotely Rolling Stonesy. But in 1964, they essentially turned the Sesame Street Theme Song into a fine little rock n roll song. The Valentino’s version reminds me of what a theme park would call “Rockin'”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V15Pezu4QaU
I don’t feel like choosing one version over the other, but there is much to love in the Valentinos’ recording. I was thinking that it had a Memphis/New Orleans feel with a little country mixed in, but the Womacks were raised in Cleveland and recorded, I think, in L.A., so I don’t know where that comes from.
Certainly the tuba playing the bass part is funky, and I love the drumming, the way the fills go where they feel like going, irrespective of the bar lines. With the off-mic hollering, it feels a lot freer than the Stones’ version, which is sleek and focused by comparison.
One of the main things I love about the Stones’ recording is the texture of the two guitars, the finger-picking balanced nicely against the crackling power-chords. The solo is a little lame though — Keith only had three or four lead riffs in his bag of tricks then and so he just uses them over and over to fill up the allotted time.
The real hero is Wyman. I’d never noticed the bass before, but, now that I’ve heard the original, I can hear him trying to get something of the syncopation of that tuba part into the song. You can hear it best during the solo.
And I admit that Jagger’s restrained singing in a lower register works better than Womack’s more agitated style.
But thanks for posting this, hvb. I really got a kick out of it. They don’t make ’em like this anymore, if they ever did.
BigSteve wrote:
Wyman – or Richards or whoever was playing bass on Stones recordings into the mid-70s – was often the secret hero of that band. 2000 Man burned me some Goats Head Soup-era live boots that have the characteristically thin sound expected of probably an 8th-generation dubbed and burned bootleg recording, but Wyman’s syncopated bass lines are the difference between the Stones and any of a dozen, modern-day “Stoney” bands you might hear coming out of the alt.rock scene.
Fuck all that shit. You’re mad, hrrundi. The Valentinos version is fine, but the Stones’ version pisses all over it. I just don’t get what you’re hearing, but then again, to each his/her own here.
I gotta go with BigSteve here; I ain’t choosing. It’s apples and oranges. The only thing these two recordings have in common is the song. And while I’m big on the kind of pseudo-cleverness that that statement oozes, in this case it’s actually true.