Expecting Rain

Go to main page
It is currently Wed October 18th, 2017, 07:41 GMT

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 39 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat September 26th, 2009, 14:49 GMT 

Joined: Sat August 16th, 2008, 21:48 GMT
Posts: 2871
Location: Connecticut
Lots of great posts guys thanks. great versions posts, reccommended dates & You tube. appreciated. MEZ!!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 29th, 2012, 06:39 GMT 
Titanium Member

Joined: Sun January 4th, 2009, 23:46 GMT
Posts: 5212
I WANT YOU

Dylan / Cameron Crowe

This song was finished in the Nashville hotel room where Dylan stayed while making Blonde On Blonde. Dylan taught Kooper the piano part, and Kooper played it again and again while Dylan worked out the final lyrics. This was the last song cut for Blonde On Blonde. The memorable guitar figure was played by Wayne Moss.

Robert Shelton

Once rumoured the album title, Dylan only knows why he dropped it. He could quite readily turn out a chart hit, this reached #20. A study in contrasts – the hook that ends the four verses sounds nearly inane, with the short, easily remembered cadences that make a hit. They are counterbalanced by the felicitous metaphors that pepper the main verses. The presence of that guilt-ridden undertaker and the boozed-up politician add the implied sense of frustration. Bill King also found a “rebuttal of the true love myth”, a song about “wanting and never getting”.

Nigel Williamson

I Want You is something of an oddity as a mid-1960s Dylan song – an apparently straight pop number with a bouncy melody, a delightful guitar motif by Nashville sessioner Wayne Moss, a mischievous charm and perhaps the most direct and uncomplicated chorus he ever wrote. As such, it is no surprise that it was a Top-20 hit in Britain and America when released as a single in the summer of 1966.

Some who cannot except that Dylan could write something so straight-forward have speculated that it is actually a song about his alleged addiction to heroin. The notion is surely ludicrous and most will prefer to believe that the song is an honest expression of his desire for Sara Lowndes, whom he had recently married. Within the lyric there lurks a typical list of Dylanesque characters, from guilty undertakers to drunken politicians – but the object of his love provides a refuge from all of them.

The most easily identifiable character is Brian Jones as the “dancing child with his Chinese suit”. Dylan had spent time showing him the clubs of Greenwich Village in November 1965, around the same period he was starting work on the songs for Blonde On Blonde, and Jones had just such a suit.

Andy Gill

The third single taken from the album, I Want You was a Top-20 hit on both sides of the Atlantic when it was released in Summer 1966. Musically the straightest pop track he ever recorded, the song's lyrics occupy a curious position, balanced as they are between the most direct of address and the most obfuscatory of images. It is perhaps for this reason that the song is sometimes taken to be about heroin — the ecstatic profusion of imagery prompting a recurrent plea for more.

Through the verses, we encounter a typical parade of Dylan characters, too numerous to inhabit the song's three minutes comfortably – a guilty undertaker, a lonesome organ grinder, weeping mothers, fathers, daughters, sleeping saviors, the Queen of Spades, a chambermaid and a "dancing child with his Chinese suit" – the last rumored to refer to Brian Jones, to whom Dylan was on occasion not very cute, allegedly. From this confusing tangle of characters and interrogations, Dylan emerges to repeat his simplest, most straightforward of choruses, the most basic of testaments to his affection. It is as if the simple, secure love expressed so directly in the choruses offers him a refuge from the confusion and demands of his everyday life – it is the fixed point to which he can return after battling the demons of his imagination and the duties of his career.

It was also the last song cut for the album. "When we were running the stuff down in his hotel room, I went x mental over that track," recalls Al Kooper. "I kept saying, 'Let's do I Want You', and Bob just kept putting it off, just to piss me off. He knew he was going to do it, but I kept pressing, because I had all these arrangement ideas, and I was afraid it wouldn't get cut, but he kept saying, 'No,' until finally, on the last night, I taught it to the band before he came in. "When he came in, I said, 'I took the liberty of teaching them I Want You,' and he just smiled at me and said, 'Well, yeah, we could do that.' I said, 'It's all set, just come on in and plug into this.' I had the basic arrangement in my head, but then Wayne Moss played that 16th-note guitar run, and I wasn't ready for that. It was a wonderful addition to what I had in mind. That was one I wrote out parts for, which the musicians embellished in their wonderful Nashville way, and it became even bigger than what I had heard in that track."

Paul Williams

I Want You and Stuck Inside Of Mobile With The Memphis Blues Again are two more indispensable Dylan performances. They go together nicely, and in fact one of the minor triumphs of this album is the programming, the order of the songs and the way they work together as album sides on the original two-record album. It is not just a collection of 14 songs, but a kind of symphony in four parts. Particularly successful is the third side, five songs that are not among the album's standouts individually but that flow together into a dense, enticing tapestry of sound and story, with unforgettable horn riffs and immortal snatches of lyrics ("to live outside the law you must be honest") jumping out at you from the general fray.

Mike Marqusee

I Want You has the simplest and most conventional of all love-song titles, but it is packed with enigmatic imagery and haunted by ambivalent emotions. The slinking, intricate first verse evokes a fluid, ghostly, treacherously ephemeral environment in which desire itself seems the only thing that's fixed and real, though not its objects. In fact, the object of Dylan's obsession in this song scarcely exists; there is no flattery, no ef¬fort to seduce her. The point of the song is that desire cannot be ex¬plained or justified. Despite rejection, competition, friends' counsel, and his own better judgment, Dylan wants her, and that is pain and pleasure rolled into one. In the final verse the singer is driven to assault a rival, then collapses into a stammering wreck. But in the meantime Dylan vents his anger at women in general in a harsh, stunningly cynical bridge:

Now all my fathers, they've gone down
True love they've been without it.
But all their daughters put me down
'Cause I don't think about it.

Clinton Heylin

Published lyrics: Writings and Drawings; Lyrics 1985; Lyrics 2004.
Known studio recordings: Studio A, Nashville, 9 March 1966 – 5 takes [BOB-tk.5].
First known performance: San Antonio, 11 May 1976.

I Want You was apparently the last song recorded for Blonde On Blonde, occupying the last four hours – from 3am to 7am on 10 March 1966 – as the clock ticked down to Dylan's departure for St Louis to resume his American tour. After recording loose-end blues and a “Sally Army” sing-along, Dylan finally returned to the kind of edgy excursion that had occupied him with songs like Just Like A Woman and One of Us Must Know (Sooner Or Later). I Want You certainly has that 3am feel about it, as he admits to a physical desire previously kept abstract (Sad-Eyed Lady Of The Lowlands) or asexual (Love Minus Zero / No Limit).

According to Kooper, it was a song Dylan had been playing around with for some time, deliberately leaving it last “to bug him.” The existing manuscript suggests, rather, that Dylan was still working on the song, containing lines like, “The deputies I see they went / Your father's ghost... to ha[u]nt / Just what it is that / Want from you,” indicating a sketch in progress. When he does start recording, however, the lyrics are largely in place, and it takes just five takes to wrap up his latest, substantive dream.

I Want You suggests someone still tempted to love the one he is with, even when he would “like to be” somewhere else. Again he cannot resist introducing a queen to the proceedings, “the Queen of Spades”, who along with her chambermaid provides displaced solace for the lonely narrator. Nor does he refrain from reinstating the archetypal “other suitor” – this one a “dancing child with his Chinese suit” – who dogs his steps throughout.

Dylan's lyrical depiction of the “dancing child” has fueled the theory that he is describing Brian Jones of The Rolling Stones fame. The “Chinese suit,” the “flute” (Jones being The Rolling Stones' multi-instrumentalist), and the reference to how “time was on his side” (Time Is On My Side being The Rolling Stones' first United States hit) lends some substance to this supposition. Dylan had spent a great deal of time with Jones in November 1965, finding out firsthand how insecure this fellow pop star could be. So whom did “the dancing child” take “for a ride”? Both Jones and Dylan were still friendly with Nico. Or are we back to “the real heroine of Blonde On Blonde”? Intriguingly the verse has generally been omitted in its live incarnations, as if no longer relevant.

The Dylan who delivers the chorus is hurting. The need is real – real enough for Dylan to generally give the song an inflection of real interest when he performs it. The gorgeous tune helps, being a perfect illustration of what he was talking about when he told one reporter, as he started work on Blonde On Blonde, that he tended to “think of [a song] in terms of a whole thing. It's not just pretty words to a tune or putting tunes to words. [It's] the words and the music [together] -I can hear the sound of what I want to say.”
It would take Dylan ten more years to resurrect I Want You, which he finally did on the second Rolling Thunder Revue – a series of shows that could qualify as the Blonde On Blonde tour (he performed seven of the 13 songs at these shows). Here it is given more of a clippety-clop arrangement, with pedal steel and audible acoustic guitar providing more of a Nashville feel than the original. Two years later he stripped the song back down – much as Bruce Springsteen had in the winter of 1975 – making a torch ballad of it. Then, in 1987 it was sped up again. Throughout the early stages of the Never Ending Tour, Dylan veered from soulful to speedy, before deciding it (and his vocal chords) might prefer the song as a ballad. By the time of the Supper Club shows in November 1993 (and Unplugged shows in 1994) he had returned to doing it in a way that emphasized the agony and ecstasy of his need: 'I wasn't born to lose you. I want you sooooooo bad.'

Dave Marsh – 1,001 Greatest Singles Ever Made #94

What is folk-rock? In commercial terms, the answer is simple – it is what happened when Dylan went electric. But that is not adequate or accurate, not when the liner notes to Elvis Presley’s first album refer to him in terms of “commercial folk music”, and the cover depicts him in a pose reminiscent of no one so much as Josh White.

But all rock is not folk-rock, either, and no one today would argue that Elvis Presley singing Little Richard songs really qualifies (although his Old Shep may be another matter). Carl Perkins’ original Blue Suede Shoes is another story. Sun is famed for its echo, but there is no feeling of distance in this record – you can almost see Perkins’ face an inch or so away from the microphone, hear his guitar as if it was in the room. Perkins is restrained, keeping a lot more energy in reserve than, say, Jerry Lee Lewis or Little Richard or Buddy Holly, much less Presley or even Perkins himself on tracks like his revamped rendition of the Blind Lemon Jefferson folk-blues, Matchbox. In the sense that we have come to understand the music, Presley’s version of Blue Suede Shoes (which was also a hit) is much more a rock ‘n’ roll number. But Perkins is not singing country and he sure is not making rhythm and blues, and there is no brand of pop music that he fits into, either. Folk-rock explains Blue Suede Shoes better than anything.

Folk purists would reject Perkin’s claim (if he had ever made it) because he wrote his song as a commercial project, based on observation of a community in which he was not a participant. But what about La Bamba, a traditional Mexican huapango, a wedding song from Vera Cruz? According to Del-Fi owner-producer Bob Keene, even though Richie Valens sang La Bamba for his friends all the time, he was reluctant to put this rock ‘n’ roll arrangement on tape, because “he was afraid that recording it would demean his culture or something”. Alens was probably worried because he had tampered with the song something fierce, both lyrics and music, so much so that those latter-day folkies, Los Lobos, had to “correct” his interpretation when they had a hit with it in 1987. They did this so successfully that they dispersed all the manic energy of the Valens version – which for all we know may have been driven there by Richie’s fear that Mexican nationalists would stomp him for demeaning their culture. Valens certainly sounds like he has got something dogging him as he utters those final dramatic bam-mam-bamba‘s.

If folk-rock really stemmed from Dylan, though, then the first folk-rock hit was almost certainly The Animals’ House Of The Rising Sun, a traditional blues whose arrangement bears telltale signs of having been learned from Dylan’s all-acoustic first album. (Dylan learned it from Ur-folkie Dave Van Ronk, although, he remarked in the album’s liner notes, “I’d always known Risin’ Sun but never really knew I knew it until I heard Dave sing it.” Which only shows how much Dylan had really learned from Little Richard).

Where The Animals exceeded Dylan was the amount of sheer dramatic power they found latent in the chords themselves. Alan Price’s bold organ and Eric Burton’s howling vocal released all of it, as if they had connected the ancient tune to a live wire. Problem was, Burton was far too macho – brattish spawn of Newcastle coal miners that he was – to sing the song from a female perspective, as it had always been sung. So he turned the lyric around, portraying the prostitute as a male and, thus, himself as a catamite. Between that and the consequences of a heavy Geordie accent aping an Iron Range Minnesotan aping a New Yorker aping a Mississippi sharecropper, which rendered the lyrics marvellously incoherent, The Animals set a new standard for all future folk-rock and blues-rock remakes.

Dylan’s own I Want You, on the other hand, is not folk-rock at all. It is a pop song, and a love song at that, as well as his second-biggest hit of the 1960s. What might throw a casual listener off is an image of folk music that connects that style to quasi-lyrics and therefore labels all of Dylan’s pre-Nashville Skyline music “folk”. In fact, these lyrics are not especially poetic anyway, though they are so obscurantist that you can play all kinds of games about what Dylan really means when he sings, “Now all your fathers they’ve gone down / True love, they’ve been without it / But all their daughters put me down / ‘Cause I don’t think about it”. Having studied the disc in detail since I was 16, I can now state that this most likely means two things – Dylan had found a clever rhyme, or he thought about it all the time, maybe even too much. However, the joyful music, with its kinky organ, rollicking piano, and the loopiest singing Dylan’s ever done (as if he found the word “bad” intoxicating all by itself) indicate that he had actually found a way of getting the proportions about right - which is not a folk-rock virtue, either, but does make I Want You a great rock ‘n’ roll record.

Mojo 2005 Readers Poll #38

Jeremy Vine (BBC Radio 2) – Mojo 100 Greatest Dylan Love Songs #28

There is a particular experience I associate with the song. I used to do hospital radio when I was 16, at a psychiatric hospital in Banstead, Surrey. Occasionally, patients would wander up with requests, and this guy hung around for 90 minutes, clearly deep in thought, and just said, “I Want You by Dylan”, so I played it, which was the first time I had heard the song.

Here are two sides to the track the patient could have keyed into – the uplifting effect if you were feeling troubled, or the disturbed lyrics. Lyrically, it is like a gag, a cartoon, a feature film or a colourful painting. It feels like a bucket that has been tipped out. There are so many images, so much going on, from that first line, “The guilty undertaker sighs / The lonesome organ grinder cries”, it is fabulous.You do not know what these characters are doing. It is like a circus and everyone is jumping around.There is this great combination of confusion and the real purity of Dylan’s sentiment. It feels to me like the lyrics are showing off to someone he did not know that well, like someone he spent an evening with and it did not work out, because there is a sense of sustained unfulfilment. It is not something you write for a wife. The trouble with a lot of his lyrics is that when you start digging, they fall apart, which is not always bad because they are amazing glass constructions. Here, you are caught between the artifice and the real emotion. He dribbles the ball in a fancy way and then scores with a tap in. I like the way the lyric does not drown in its own complication. But most of all, I love I Want You because it makes me feel happy. The melody is wrapped in tinsel, like turning on all the fairy-lights, all bouncy and joyous. The chord changes all go to the right place, down and up, and it is beautifully structured. Did it take him five minutes to write or five weeks? I know his answer, which is five minutes.

Oliver Trager

Dylan’s most traditional pop song deftly balances some of his most romantic, if muddled, images and his most personal plea. The last song cut for Dylan’s perennially resonant Blonde On Blonde album, I Want You was finished in the Nashville hotel room where Dylan stayed while making the record. Dylan had taught Al Kooper the piano part, and Kooper played it over and over while the author worked out the final lyric. As an A-side single, I Want You hit #20 on the Billboard chart – not bad for a bit of chaotic pop surrealism portraying the happy, intoxicating infatuation of newfound love and including a cast of characters that could have jumped right off a Dali canvas – a guilty undertaker, a weeping mother, the Queen of Spades, a chambermaid, a dancing child with his Chinese suit, a lonesome organ grinder, and a drunken politician. The song was once rumoured to be the title cut for the album that became Blonde On Blonde.

In its original release, I Want You has an exuberant, irrestible melody, a searing harmonica solo, and an intriguing guitar filigree by Nashville session man Wayne Moss. The song captures the unbound feeling of a new romance, with Dylan sounding fresh and vibrant. From his teaming tangle of characters and images, Dylan emerges from each chorus with a simple, straightforward testament declaring the most basic of desires. While some critics consider I Want You to be lightweight pop, others see Dylan toying with the myth of true love in his metaphorical implementation of his characters, their situation and the implied, as yet unrequited, longing of the singer. I Want You, they say, is about wanting but never getting.

Dylan first performed I Want You with an impromptu unit that included members of The Band and Neil Young in March 1973 at the benefit concert for SNACK (Students Need Athletic And Cultural Kicks) at San Francisco’s long-gone home of the football ‘49ers, Kezar Stadium. It became a painful dirge on the 1976 leg of The Rolling Thunder Revue, then, in 1978, Dylan drastically altered the song, daringly transforming it into a wistful torch ballad for his 1978 Elvis Presley-style world tour, creating an effective, haunting version that had his beautiful singing backed up by Steve Douglas on recorder. The infectious, up-tempo version of I Want You returned in 1981, but Dylan did not touch the song again until the Tom Petty And The Heartbreakers and The Grateful Dead tours in 1986 and 1987, respectively. Thereafter, Dylan has periodically visited I Want You during The Never Ending Tour. And as late as 2003, it was featured with a chunky though vital power chord arrangement.

A final note – the 2003 film Identity, starring Amanda Peet and John Cusack, makes unusual use of the song.

James Blunt

I covered I Want You, and we put it out in the States on a Dylan tribute album. I had written a song called I Really Want You, which drew my attention to Dylan’s song, and there was something so unbelievably compelling about the way he sang those three words, “I want you”. There’s a real frustration to the way he was singing. It was captivating, and I could relate to it.

Roger Ford

Here the characteristic difference between the early UK / Canadian mono mix and the finished US version is at its most extreme, with the former sounding really murky in comparison, and Kenny Buttrey's great drumming practically buried. As well as having a crisper sound, the US version is the more polished in having a small vocal slip in the last verse edited out. In fact, everyone who knows Blonde On Blonde will be familiar with this mistake, as it has been left untouched on all stereo versions of the album, as well as on the early UK / Canadian mono mix. Just before "because time was on his side", you can hear Dylan sing something that was probably supposed to be "and" but didn't quite make it. On the US mono album this syllable is absent.

One more difference between the mono mixes: the UK/Canadian version is quite a lot longer on the instrumental fade-out, and is still the longest version released.

The original stereo vinyl version doesn't have the deep bass response of the mono mix, but it does have a much warmer sound than is typical of the stereo LP. In terms of instrument balance, the repetitive lead guitar figure is much less pronounced here, while the piano is conversely more noticeable. The second stereo mix has a much thinner, more trebly sound, and the lead guitar is much more audible.

On the original CD the sound and instrument balance is generally similar to the second stereo vinyl mix, but with the bass response somewhat restored, and of course in generally higher fidelity.

Mark Wilder's remix for the MasterSound edition is closer to the original 1966 stereo version: the sound is very much warmer and more bass-heavy than on the original CD - excessively so, I think, in relation to all the other tracks. The lead guitar, though, is stronger than on the original stereo mix. The fade is typically abrupt.

The stereo SACD mix is wonderful, the epitome of Blonde On Blonde's sound: complex, almost orchestral, but at the same time effortlessly fluid. As Dylan once said of Doc Watson's guitar playing, it's just like water running. It's hard to deduce, though, whether the old vinyl copy Michael Brauer was using as his model for contained the original stereo mix or whether it had the revised mix. The fullness of the bass suggests the former, but the clarity of the electric guitar and the drums is rather more like the latter. The length of the fade-out offers no clue either, as the two vinyl mixes were very close in this regard, and Brauer's version sits right between them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 29th, 2012, 16:36 GMT 

Joined: Fri September 26th, 2008, 18:26 GMT
Posts: 92
TheTruthIsObscure wrote:
Some live performances:

Vancouver, 20.7.2005
The last time he played it in concert. The band does a fine, quasi-acoustic arrangement but unfortunately the vocal performance is not as good as it should be.
http://www.sendspace.com/file/zo5uae

Canandaigua, 28.6.1988
One of the earliest NET performances, my favourite version from the G.E.Smith era
http://www.sendspace.com/file/ge292a

Brussels, 8.10.1987
The Heartbreakers was the only band that could play a really good pastiche of the original. I saw the show in Dortmund that year and "I Want" was not only a very pleasant surprise but also one of the best performances of that particular concert. This version from Brussels sounds a little bizarre. There is a long instrumental part at the beginning, obviously he didn't like to start singing or he had forgotten the lyrics. The ending is also amusing.
http://www.sendspace.com/file/r3ezf0

Paris´, 5.7.1978
I think the slow arrangement that year was a very successful.
http://www.sendspace.com/file/ca89e8

Oklahoma City, 18.5.1976
http://www.sendspace.com/file/thmx4j



Any chance you or someone could re-post these files?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 29th, 2012, 17:05 GMT 
User avatar

Joined: Sat April 8th, 2006, 22:57 GMT
Posts: 2251
slimharpo wrote:
TheTruthIsObscure wrote:
Some live performances:

Vancouver, 20.7.2005
The last time he played it in concert. The band does a fine, quasi-acoustic arrangement but unfortunately the vocal performance is not as good as it should be.
http://www.sendspace.com/file/zo5uae

Canandaigua, 28.6.1988
One of the earliest NET performances, my favourite version from the G.E.Smith era
http://www.sendspace.com/file/ge292a

Brussels, 8.10.1987
The Heartbreakers was the only band that could play a really good pastiche of the original. I saw the show in Dortmund that year and "I Want" was not only a very pleasant surprise but also one of the best performances of that particular concert. This version from Brussels sounds a little bizarre. There is a long instrumental part at the beginning, obviously he didn't like to start singing or he had forgotten the lyrics. The ending is also amusing.
http://www.sendspace.com/file/r3ezf0

Paris´, 5.7.1978
I think the slow arrangement that year was a very successful.
http://www.sendspace.com/file/ca89e8

Oklahoma City, 18.5.1976
http://www.sendspace.com/file/thmx4j



Any chance you or someone could re-post these files?


Are there any of these kinds of collections on bootlegs, or etc.? Don't know how to search for what I'm asking, (search terms) but what I mean is, a whole collection on one CD with the same song, different versions of? Not only of this song, but others? Like a mood collection of one written something, but just that one.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 30th, 2012, 01:57 GMT 
Titanium Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 11th, 2011, 05:31 GMT
Posts: 5032
I love his singing in this song. Fits the music & lyrics perfectly.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 30th, 2012, 09:29 GMT 
User avatar

Joined: Tue February 8th, 2011, 09:32 GMT
Posts: 1847
Location: The mystic garden, outside the chelsea hotel, near Montague Street...
great song. personal favourite version is on At budokan.....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 31st, 2012, 07:30 GMT 

Joined: Mon January 8th, 2007, 19:59 GMT
Posts: 265
slimharpo wrote:
TheTruthIsObscure wrote:
Some live performances:

Vancouver, 20.7.2005
The last time he played it in concert. The band does a fine, quasi-acoustic arrangement but unfortunately the vocal performance is not as good as it should be.
http://www.sendspace.com/file/zo5uae

Canandaigua, 28.6.1988
One of the earliest NET performances, my favourite version from the G.E.Smith era
http://www.sendspace.com/file/ge292a

Brussels, 8.10.1987
The Heartbreakers was the only band that could play a really good pastiche of the original. I saw the show in Dortmund that year and "I Want" was not only a very pleasant surprise but also one of the best performances of that particular concert. This version from Brussels sounds a little bizarre. There is a long instrumental part at the beginning, obviously he didn't like to start singing or he had forgotten the lyrics. The ending is also amusing.
http://www.sendspace.com/file/r3ezf0

Paris´, 5.7.1978
I think the slow arrangement that year was a very successful.
http://www.sendspace.com/file/ca89e8

Oklahoma City, 18.5.1976
http://www.sendspace.com/file/thmx4j



Any chance you or someone could re-post these files?



All 5 versions together in a zip-file:

http://www.sendspace.com/file/hv18an

At the moment I prefer the one from 2005, especially because of the wonderful guitar-solo. I really don't understand why he never performed this song again.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 31st, 2012, 07:38 GMT 

Joined: Thu August 30th, 2007, 22:44 GMT
Posts: 3974
Not a popular choice, but weak as the album may be, I'm partial to the version on Dylan & The Dead.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat December 28th, 2013, 03:26 GMT 

Joined: Wed April 11th, 2007, 04:15 GMT
Posts: 1486
Location: City of Angels
I've been jammin out to some 1990 recently and a few amazing performances of this
beautiful song have cropped up throughout my journeys through Bob's 'dark' years of the early 90's....

The very last song recorded for Blonde On Blonde, it's certainly in my top 10 Dylan songs....

Check out this bad boy!! Bob's harmonica here is mind-blowing:
Portland OR
August 21 1990
http://www.sendspace.com/file/fnp63n

And then here's this incredible video of the awesome version he did at the Hammersmith earlier that year:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKMHob8b ... aa3_TaUQNw


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat December 28th, 2013, 13:45 GMT 
Titanium Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri December 9th, 2011, 00:25 GMT
Posts: 6645
nellie wrote:
I WANT YOU

Dylan / Cameron Crowe

This song was finished in the Nashville hotel room where Dylan stayed while making Blonde On Blonde. Dylan taught Kooper the piano part, and Kooper played it again and again while Dylan worked out the final lyrics. This was the last song cut for Blonde On Blonde. The memorable guitar figure was played by Wayne Moss.

Robert Shelton

Once rumoured the album title, Dylan only knows why he dropped it. He could quite readily turn out a chart hit, this reached #20. A study in contrasts – the hook that ends the four verses sounds nearly inane, with the short, easily remembered cadences that make a hit. They are counterbalanced by the felicitous metaphors that pepper the main verses. The presence of that guilt-ridden undertaker and the boozed-up politician add the implied sense of frustration. Bill King also found a “rebuttal of the true love myth”, a song about “wanting and never getting”.

Nigel Williamson

I Want You is something of an oddity as a mid-1960s Dylan song – an apparently straight pop number with a bouncy melody, a delightful guitar motif by Nashville sessioner Wayne Moss, a mischievous charm and perhaps the most direct and uncomplicated chorus he ever wrote. As such, it is no surprise that it was a Top-20 hit in Britain and America when released as a single in the summer of 1966.

Some who cannot except that Dylan could write something so straight-forward have speculated that it is actually a song about his alleged addiction to heroin. The notion is surely ludicrous and most will prefer to believe that the song is an honest expression of his desire for Sara Lowndes, whom he had recently married. Within the lyric there lurks a typical list of Dylanesque characters, from guilty undertakers to drunken politicians – but the object of his love provides a refuge from all of them.

The most easily identifiable character is Brian Jones as the “dancing child with his Chinese suit”. Dylan had spent time showing him the clubs of Greenwich Village in November 1965, around the same period he was starting work on the songs for Blonde On Blonde, and Jones had just such a suit.

Andy Gill

The third single taken from the album, I Want You was a Top-20 hit on both sides of the Atlantic when it was released in Summer 1966. Musically the straightest pop track he ever recorded, the song's lyrics occupy a curious position, balanced as they are between the most direct of address and the most obfuscatory of images. It is perhaps for this reason that the song is sometimes taken to be about heroin — the ecstatic profusion of imagery prompting a recurrent plea for more.

Through the verses, we encounter a typical parade of Dylan characters, too numerous to inhabit the song's three minutes comfortably – a guilty undertaker, a lonesome organ grinder, weeping mothers, fathers, daughters, sleeping saviors, the Queen of Spades, a chambermaid and a "dancing child with his Chinese suit" – the last rumored to refer to Brian Jones, to whom Dylan was on occasion not very cute, allegedly. From this confusing tangle of characters and interrogations, Dylan emerges to repeat his simplest, most straightforward of choruses, the most basic of testaments to his affection. It is as if the simple, secure love expressed so directly in the choruses offers him a refuge from the confusion and demands of his everyday life – it is the fixed point to which he can return after battling the demons of his imagination and the duties of his career.

It was also the last song cut for the album. "When we were running the stuff down in his hotel room, I went x mental over that track," recalls Al Kooper. "I kept saying, 'Let's do I Want You', and Bob just kept putting it off, just to piss me off. He knew he was going to do it, but I kept pressing, because I had all these arrangement ideas, and I was afraid it wouldn't get cut, but he kept saying, 'No,' until finally, on the last night, I taught it to the band before he came in. "When he came in, I said, 'I took the liberty of teaching them I Want You,' and he just smiled at me and said, 'Well, yeah, we could do that.' I said, 'It's all set, just come on in and plug into this.' I had the basic arrangement in my head, but then Wayne Moss played that 16th-note guitar run, and I wasn't ready for that. It was a wonderful addition to what I had in mind. That was one I wrote out parts for, which the musicians embellished in their wonderful Nashville way, and it became even bigger than what I had heard in that track."

Paul Williams

I Want You and Stuck Inside Of Mobile With The Memphis Blues Again are two more indispensable Dylan performances. They go together nicely, and in fact one of the minor triumphs of this album is the programming, the order of the songs and the way they work together as album sides on the original two-record album. It is not just a collection of 14 songs, but a kind of symphony in four parts. Particularly successful is the third side, five songs that are not among the album's standouts individually but that flow together into a dense, enticing tapestry of sound and story, with unforgettable horn riffs and immortal snatches of lyrics ("to live outside the law you must be honest") jumping out at you from the general fray.

Mike Marqusee

I Want You has the simplest and most conventional of all love-song titles, but it is packed with enigmatic imagery and haunted by ambivalent emotions. The slinking, intricate first verse evokes a fluid, ghostly, treacherously ephemeral environment in which desire itself seems the only thing that's fixed and real, though not its objects. In fact, the object of Dylan's obsession in this song scarcely exists; there is no flattery, no ef¬fort to seduce her. The point of the song is that desire cannot be ex¬plained or justified. Despite rejection, competition, friends' counsel, and his own better judgment, Dylan wants her, and that is pain and pleasure rolled into one. In the final verse the singer is driven to assault a rival, then collapses into a stammering wreck. But in the meantime Dylan vents his anger at women in general in a harsh, stunningly cynical bridge:

Now all my fathers, they've gone down
True love they've been without it.
But all their daughters put me down
'Cause I don't think about it.

Clinton Heylin

Published lyrics: Writings and Drawings; Lyrics 1985; Lyrics 2004.
Known studio recordings: Studio A, Nashville, 9 March 1966 – 5 takes [BOB-tk.5].
First known performance: San Antonio, 11 May 1976.

I Want You was apparently the last song recorded for Blonde On Blonde, occupying the last four hours – from 3am to 7am on 10 March 1966 – as the clock ticked down to Dylan's departure for St Louis to resume his American tour. After recording loose-end blues and a “Sally Army” sing-along, Dylan finally returned to the kind of edgy excursion that had occupied him with songs like Just Like A Woman and One of Us Must Know (Sooner Or Later). I Want You certainly has that 3am feel about it, as he admits to a physical desire previously kept abstract (Sad-Eyed Lady Of The Lowlands) or asexual (Love Minus Zero / No Limit).

According to Kooper, it was a song Dylan had been playing around with for some time, deliberately leaving it last “to bug him.” The existing manuscript suggests, rather, that Dylan was still working on the song, containing lines like, “The deputies I see they went / Your father's ghost... to ha[u]nt / Just what it is that / Want from you,” indicating a sketch in progress. When he does start recording, however, the lyrics are largely in place, and it takes just five takes to wrap up his latest, substantive dream.

I Want You suggests someone still tempted to love the one he is with, even when he would “like to be” somewhere else. Again he cannot resist introducing a queen to the proceedings, “the Queen of Spades”, who along with her chambermaid provides displaced solace for the lonely narrator. Nor does he refrain from reinstating the archetypal “other suitor” – this one a “dancing child with his Chinese suit” – who dogs his steps throughout.

Dylan's lyrical depiction of the “dancing child” has fueled the theory that he is describing Brian Jones of The Rolling Stones fame. The “Chinese suit,” the “flute” (Jones being The Rolling Stones' multi-instrumentalist), and the reference to how “time was on his side” (Time Is On My Side being The Rolling Stones' first United States hit) lends some substance to this supposition. Dylan had spent a great deal of time with Jones in November 1965, finding out firsthand how insecure this fellow pop star could be. So whom did “the dancing child” take “for a ride”? Both Jones and Dylan were still friendly with Nico. Or are we back to “the real heroine of Blonde On Blonde”? Intriguingly the verse has generally been omitted in its live incarnations, as if no longer relevant.

The Dylan who delivers the chorus is hurting. The need is real – real enough for Dylan to generally give the song an inflection of real interest when he performs it. The gorgeous tune helps, being a perfect illustration of what he was talking about when he told one reporter, as he started work on Blonde On Blonde, that he tended to “think of [a song] in terms of a whole thing. It's not just pretty words to a tune or putting tunes to words. [It's] the words and the music [together] -I can hear the sound of what I want to say.”
It would take Dylan ten more years to resurrect I Want You, which he finally did on the second Rolling Thunder Revue – a series of shows that could qualify as the Blonde On Blonde tour (he performed seven of the 13 songs at these shows). Here it is given more of a clippety-clop arrangement, with pedal steel and audible acoustic guitar providing more of a Nashville feel than the original. Two years later he stripped the song back down – much as Bruce Springsteen had in the winter of 1975 – making a torch ballad of it. Then, in 1987 it was sped up again. Throughout the early stages of the Never Ending Tour, Dylan veered from soulful to speedy, before deciding it (and his vocal chords) might prefer the song as a ballad. By the time of the Supper Club shows in November 1993 (and Unplugged shows in 1994) he had returned to doing it in a way that emphasized the agony and ecstasy of his need: 'I wasn't born to lose you. I want you sooooooo bad.'

Dave Marsh – 1,001 Greatest Singles Ever Made #94

What is folk-rock? In commercial terms, the answer is simple – it is what happened when Dylan went electric. But that is not adequate or accurate, not when the liner notes to Elvis Presley’s first album refer to him in terms of “commercial folk music”, and the cover depicts him in a pose reminiscent of no one so much as Josh White.

But all rock is not folk-rock, either, and no one today would argue that Elvis Presley singing Little Richard songs really qualifies (although his Old Shep may be another matter). Carl Perkins’ original Blue Suede Shoes is another story. Sun is famed for its echo, but there is no feeling of distance in this record – you can almost see Perkins’ face an inch or so away from the microphone, hear his guitar as if it was in the room. Perkins is restrained, keeping a lot more energy in reserve than, say, Jerry Lee Lewis or Little Richard or Buddy Holly, much less Presley or even Perkins himself on tracks like his revamped rendition of the Blind Lemon Jefferson folk-blues, Matchbox. In the sense that we have come to understand the music, Presley’s version of Blue Suede Shoes (which was also a hit) is much more a rock ‘n’ roll number. But Perkins is not singing country and he sure is not making rhythm and blues, and there is no brand of pop music that he fits into, either. Folk-rock explains Blue Suede Shoes better than anything.

Folk purists would reject Perkin’s claim (if he had ever made it) because he wrote his song as a commercial project, based on observation of a community in which he was not a participant. But what about La Bamba, a traditional Mexican huapango, a wedding song from Vera Cruz? According to Del-Fi owner-producer Bob Keene, even though Richie Valens sang La Bamba for his friends all the time, he was reluctant to put this rock ‘n’ roll arrangement on tape, because “he was afraid that recording it would demean his culture or something”. Alens was probably worried because he had tampered with the song something fierce, both lyrics and music, so much so that those latter-day folkies, Los Lobos, had to “correct” his interpretation when they had a hit with it in 1987. They did this so successfully that they dispersed all the manic energy of the Valens version – which for all we know may have been driven there by Richie’s fear that Mexican nationalists would stomp him for demeaning their culture. Valens certainly sounds like he has got something dogging him as he utters those final dramatic bam-mam-bamba‘s.

If folk-rock really stemmed from Dylan, though, then the first folk-rock hit was almost certainly The Animals’ House Of The Rising Sun, a traditional blues whose arrangement bears telltale signs of having been learned from Dylan’s all-acoustic first album. (Dylan learned it from Ur-folkie Dave Van Ronk, although, he remarked in the album’s liner notes, “I’d always known Risin’ Sun but never really knew I knew it until I heard Dave sing it.” Which only shows how much Dylan had really learned from Little Richard).

Where The Animals exceeded Dylan was the amount of sheer dramatic power they found latent in the chords themselves. Alan Price’s bold organ and Eric Burton’s howling vocal released all of it, as if they had connected the ancient tune to a live wire. Problem was, Burton was far too macho – brattish spawn of Newcastle coal miners that he was – to sing the song from a female perspective, as it had always been sung. So he turned the lyric around, portraying the prostitute as a male and, thus, himself as a catamite. Between that and the consequences of a heavy Geordie accent aping an Iron Range Minnesotan aping a New Yorker aping a Mississippi sharecropper, which rendered the lyrics marvellously incoherent, The Animals set a new standard for all future folk-rock and blues-rock remakes.

Dylan’s own I Want You, on the other hand, is not folk-rock at all. It is a pop song, and a love song at that, as well as his second-biggest hit of the 1960s. What might throw a casual listener off is an image of folk music that connects that style to quasi-lyrics and therefore labels all of Dylan’s pre-Nashville Skyline music “folk”. In fact, these lyrics are not especially poetic anyway, though they are so obscurantist that you can play all kinds of games about what Dylan really means when he sings, “Now all your fathers they’ve gone down / True love, they’ve been without it / But all their daughters put me down / ‘Cause I don’t think about it”. Having studied the disc in detail since I was 16, I can now state that this most likely means two things – Dylan had found a clever rhyme, or he thought about it all the time, maybe even too much. However, the joyful music, with its kinky organ, rollicking piano, and the loopiest singing Dylan’s ever done (as if he found the word “bad” intoxicating all by itself) indicate that he had actually found a way of getting the proportions about right - which is not a folk-rock virtue, either, but does make I Want You a great rock ‘n’ roll record.

Mojo 2005 Readers Poll #38

Jeremy Vine (BBC Radio 2) – Mojo 100 Greatest Dylan Love Songs #28

There is a particular experience I associate with the song. I used to do hospital radio when I was 16, at a psychiatric hospital in Banstead, Surrey. Occasionally, patients would wander up with requests, and this guy hung around for 90 minutes, clearly deep in thought, and just said, “I Want You by Dylan”, so I played it, which was the first time I had heard the song.

Here are two sides to the track the patient could have keyed into – the uplifting effect if you were feeling troubled, or the disturbed lyrics. Lyrically, it is like a gag, a cartoon, a feature film or a colourful painting. It feels like a bucket that has been tipped out. There are so many images, so much going on, from that first line, “The guilty undertaker sighs / The lonesome organ grinder cries”, it is fabulous.You do not know what these characters are doing. It is like a circus and everyone is jumping around.There is this great combination of confusion and the real purity of Dylan’s sentiment. It feels to me like the lyrics are showing off to someone he did not know that well, like someone he spent an evening with and it did not work out, because there is a sense of sustained unfulfilment. It is not something you write for a wife. The trouble with a lot of his lyrics is that when you start digging, they fall apart, which is not always bad because they are amazing glass constructions. Here, you are caught between the artifice and the real emotion. He dribbles the ball in a fancy way and then scores with a tap in. I like the way the lyric does not drown in its own complication. But most of all, I love I Want You because it makes me feel happy. The melody is wrapped in tinsel, like turning on all the fairy-lights, all bouncy and joyous. The chord changes all go to the right place, down and up, and it is beautifully structured. Did it take him five minutes to write or five weeks? I know his answer, which is five minutes.

Oliver Trager

Dylan’s most traditional pop song deftly balances some of his most romantic, if muddled, images and his most personal plea. The last song cut for Dylan’s perennially resonant Blonde On Blonde album, I Want You was finished in the Nashville hotel room where Dylan stayed while making the record. Dylan had taught Al Kooper the piano part, and Kooper played it over and over while the author worked out the final lyric. As an A-side single, I Want You hit #20 on the Billboard chart – not bad for a bit of chaotic pop surrealism portraying the happy, intoxicating infatuation of newfound love and including a cast of characters that could have jumped right off a Dali canvas – a guilty undertaker, a weeping mother, the Queen of Spades, a chambermaid, a dancing child with his Chinese suit, a lonesome organ grinder, and a drunken politician. The song was once rumoured to be the title cut for the album that became Blonde On Blonde.

In its original release, I Want You has an exuberant, irrestible melody, a searing harmonica solo, and an intriguing guitar filigree by Nashville session man Wayne Moss. The song captures the unbound feeling of a new romance, with Dylan sounding fresh and vibrant. From his teaming tangle of characters and images, Dylan emerges from each chorus with a simple, straightforward testament declaring the most basic of desires. While some critics consider I Want You to be lightweight pop, others see Dylan toying with the myth of true love in his metaphorical implementation of his characters, their situation and the implied, as yet unrequited, longing of the singer. I Want You, they say, is about wanting but never getting.

Dylan first performed I Want You with an impromptu unit that included members of The Band and Neil Young in March 1973 at the benefit concert for SNACK (Students Need Athletic And Cultural Kicks) at San Francisco’s long-gone home of the football ‘49ers, Kezar Stadium. It became a painful dirge on the 1976 leg of The Rolling Thunder Revue, then, in 1978, Dylan drastically altered the song, daringly transforming it into a wistful torch ballad for his 1978 Elvis Presley-style world tour, creating an effective, haunting version that had his beautiful singing backed up by Steve Douglas on recorder. The infectious, up-tempo version of I Want You returned in 1981, but Dylan did not touch the song again until the Tom Petty And The Heartbreakers and The Grateful Dead tours in 1986 and 1987, respectively. Thereafter, Dylan has periodically visited I Want You during The Never Ending Tour. And as late as 2003, it was featured with a chunky though vital power chord arrangement.

A final note – the 2003 film Identity, starring Amanda Peet and John Cusack, makes unusual use of the song.

James Blunt

I covered I Want You, and we put it out in the States on a Dylan tribute album. I had written a song called I Really Want You, which drew my attention to Dylan’s song, and there was something so unbelievably compelling about the way he sang those three words, “I want you”. There’s a real frustration to the way he was singing. It was captivating, and I could relate to it.

Roger Ford

Here the characteristic difference between the early UK / Canadian mono mix and the finished US version is at its most extreme, with the former sounding really murky in comparison, and Kenny Buttrey's great drumming practically buried. As well as having a crisper sound, the US version is the more polished in having a small vocal slip in the last verse edited out. In fact, everyone who knows Blonde On Blonde will be familiar with this mistake, as it has been left untouched on all stereo versions of the album, as well as on the early UK / Canadian mono mix. Just before "because time was on his side", you can hear Dylan sing something that was probably supposed to be "and" but didn't quite make it. On the US mono album this syllable is absent.

One more difference between the mono mixes: the UK/Canadian version is quite a lot longer on the instrumental fade-out, and is still the longest version released.

The original stereo vinyl version doesn't have the deep bass response of the mono mix, but it does have a much warmer sound than is typical of the stereo LP. In terms of instrument balance, the repetitive lead guitar figure is much less pronounced here, while the piano is conversely more noticeable. The second stereo mix has a much thinner, more trebly sound, and the lead guitar is much more audible.

On the original CD the sound and instrument balance is generally similar to the second stereo vinyl mix, but with the bass response somewhat restored, and of course in generally higher fidelity.

Mark Wilder's remix for the MasterSound edition is closer to the original 1966 stereo version: the sound is very much warmer and more bass-heavy than on the original CD - excessively so, I think, in relation to all the other tracks. The lead guitar, though, is stronger than on the original stereo mix. The fade is typically abrupt.

The stereo SACD mix is wonderful, the epitome of Blonde On Blonde's sound: complex, almost orchestral, but at the same time effortlessly fluid. As Dylan once said of Doc Watson's guitar playing, it's just like water running. It's hard to deduce, though, whether the old vinyl copy Michael Brauer was using as his model for contained the original stereo mix or whether it had the revised mix. The fullness of the bass suggests the former, but the clarity of the electric guitar and the drums is rather more like the latter. The length of the fade-out offers no clue either, as the two vinyl mixes were very close in this regard, and Brauer's version sits right between them.


Much appreciated nellie. Lots of interesting stuff there. Reading it I was compelled to play the song again.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun December 29th, 2013, 09:51 GMT 
User avatar

Joined: Fri October 5th, 2012, 13:36 GMT
Posts: 596
to me, this is one of bob's musically most beautiful tunes. the unplugged version is outstanding.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun December 29th, 2013, 10:02 GMT 

Joined: Sat November 30th, 2013, 07:16 GMT
Posts: 166
Clearly this song is Dylan's take on Tom Jones' 'It's Not Unusual'.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon December 12th, 2016, 18:31 GMT 

Joined: Wed April 11th, 2007, 04:15 GMT
Posts: 1486
Location: City of Angels
I just love the Supper Club versions of this song.
Still the uptempo jaunty arrangement of the original with all of the
great acoustic energy of Unplugged, they're really special.
I love the pedal steel doing that signature riff:)
The second one is my favorite and sounds so solid.
Bob sounds so strong here and his harmonica solo is just gorgeous:

New York City NY
November 16 1993 (Late)
http://www.mediafire.com/file/waay5es0k ... nt_You.mp3

And here's the last night:
https://youtu.be/sC8q7z6oPDo


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon December 12th, 2016, 19:40 GMT 
User avatar

Joined: Mon October 18th, 2010, 03:16 GMT
Posts: 1143
I'll be a bit pedestrian and mention the obvious contenders to best version:

- The live version of "Dylan & the Dead"
- Supper Club 1993
- Rotterdam 1987
- Dortmund 1987

There, I said it.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 39 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bernie


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group