Early James Taylor and Neil Young

RussMason · #1 11-30-2012, 05:40 AM

For us old folkies, this is worth a look. Takes me back to a folkier time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UoeF2jzqFUI

GibbyPrague · #2 11-30-2012, 05:47 AM

Well that must be going back quite a while as they both had a full head of hair back then.

Interesting watching JT with his J-50. I have to admit, even as a big Gibson fan that I prefer the tone he gets with his Olson than the Gibson. The Olson seems to suit his style better where the notes can ring out clear and thick, especially with the cedar / rosewood combo.

Thans for sharing, I wasnt even born when these were shot.

justjack · #3 11-30-2012, 06:13 AM

I enjoyed watching Neil fumbling to change harmonicas.

Judson · #4 11-30-2012, 06:35 AM

Yep ...sitting down ... hair hanging over his face ... mumbling/fumbling around between songs ... almost no real stage presence ... and yet he has the audience in the palm of his hand.

That's a clip from a longer BBC show that lasts about 20 minutes. He does the same thing throughout, but the audience doesn't appear to even notice. They totally belong the NY ... a truely magnificient artist!

Quote:

Originally Posted by justjack

I enjoyed watching Neil fumbling to change harmonicas.

Joseph Hanna · #5 11-30-2012, 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GibbyPrague

Interesting watching JT with his J-50. I have to admit, even as a big Gibson fan that I prefer the tone he gets with his Olson than the Gibson. The Olson seems to suit his style better where the notes can ring out clear and thick, especially with the cedar / rosewood combo.

Thans for sharing, I wasnt even born when these were shot.

I mean obviously and on many levels this is a live recording from 40 plus years ago. The plate reverb on his vocal should be one of the obvious clues. Since eq was albeit high quality, exceedingly limited in scope. There were no notch filters or parameterics. So..if a guitar fed back you grabbed the only solution available which in those days would have been a shelf somewhere between 120 and 140 and cranked it down. That is obviously the case with the JT recording. Who knows what that guitar really sounded like but clearly that clip wouldn't be reasonable audio to compare guitar sounds.

Bronzeback · #6 11-30-2012, 07:12 AM

Two of the greats.. I was 3 in '71

Caddy · #7 11-30-2012, 07:18 AM

I really liked those acoustic singer/songwriters of that era. I was in my twenties during that time and most of the songs I write and play are still in that style.

Judson · #8 11-30-2012, 09:04 AM

Ditto ...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caddy

I really liked those acoustic singer/songwriters of that era. I was in my twenties during that time and most of the songs I write and play are still in that style.

NoPicks · #9 11-30-2012, 09:14 AM

Niiiiice clip

Not only great performances but a beautiful illustration of the difference at the time between how the Auntie Beeb (the BBC) handled music-oriented shows and the US way of going about it

On an American TV program in 1970, an actual "live" performance was pretty much unheard of. The standard way of doing things in the US was to have the artist(s) lip-synch to the exact recording that was being played on the radio. In fact I can't remember a single example where this wasn't the case (with the possible exception of Hee Haw) until the advent of Don Kirshner's Rock Concert in 1973

Contrast this with the BBC approach, in which "live" really was Live Onstage in real-time, unplanned moments and all

Steve Berger · #10 11-30-2012, 09:31 AM

My two all time favorites and biggest early musical influences - Thanks for posting!

mdutr0 · #11 11-30-2012, 09:52 AM

Love me some James Taylor but Neil Young.... try as I might I just don't get it.

I have listened to recordings, watched the old TV clips of concerts, etc. and I just do not get it. I guess he's just not my cup of tea.

James Taylor, on the other hand, can basically do no wrong IMHO.

Oh, and I wasn't even a twinkle in my mother's eye when these recordings were made.

Atticus · #12 11-30-2012, 10:24 AM

In '71 I was sixteen and was still struggling with a barred F and making quick changes from open anything to Bm. But I was already into Neil Young's music ‘cause I had been a great Buffalo Springfield fan. I still think Expecting to Fly is one of the most hauntingly beautiful songs ever written. I liked James Taylor…heck we Tarheels thought he was from North Carolina…but artists like Neil Young and Steve Stills ended up influencing my musical taste to a much greater degree. I still play Cowgirl In The Sand and Sugar Mountain as a part of my little back porch repertoire. I especially like singing Sugar Mountain to my six year old granddaughter. It always makes her smile and laugh...and it always makes me tear up.

AF

Joseph Hanna · #13 11-30-2012, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdutr0

Love me some James Taylor but Neil Young.... try as I might I just don't get it.

I have listened to recordings, watched the old TV clips of concerts, etc. and I just do not get it. I guess he's just not my cup of tea.

James Taylor, on the other hand, can basically do no wrong IMHO.

Oh, and I wasn't even a twinkle in my mother's eye when these recordings were made.

In the 60's and early 70's music played a tangibly different roll in American society. It was of much tighter weave in the day to day fabric of America. I think it's fairly obvious that someone of your age might look back and see Neil Young and kinda wonder "what the heck is that about", especially with 2013 glasses on.

Having lived in both Laurel Canyon and Topanga Canyon I'm ubber sensitive to the magic that grew out of those canyons in the 60's and 70's. It (the music) still to this day echos in those hills. That group of folks (Jackson Browne, CSN&Y, Joni Mitchell, Henley, Frey, J.D. Souther, Bonnie Raitt and to some lesser degree James Taylor and Carole King) introduced me to the very core of acoustic guitars. They introduced me to harmonies, being a hippy, Martin D-45's, Martin D-18's, long hair, pot, peace and love and for many of kids across the country they introduced Los Angeles to the world. In short there was so much about these artists that also carried the weight and tenor and over-all mood of the country as their canvas. As a younger guy (or gal) you obviously can "listen" to Neil Young music today but the backdrop and feel and the soul that many of us were feeling when we first heard Neil is long, long ago stripped away.

I think the best answer to your question is...you just had to be there.

Judson · #14 11-30-2012, 10:43 AM

I love them both dearly! The staying power of both artists has been amazing.

To me what separates them however, is that Neil Young (like his music or not) is still producing viable new stuff while JT the consumate artist/musician, is mainly still playing "Fire & Rain" and doing Christmas albums for Hallmark.

To me, NY is in a class by himself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdutr0

Love me some James Taylor but Neil Young.... try as I might I just don't get it.

I have listened to recordings, watched the old TV clips of concerts, etc. and I just do not get it. I guess he's just not my cup of tea.

James Taylor, on the other hand, can basically do no wrong IMHO.

Oh, and I wasn't even a twinkle in my mother's eye when these recordings were made.

PreWarMartin · #15 11-30-2012, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdutr0

Love me some James Taylor but Neil Young.... try as I might I just don't get it.

I have listened to recordings, watched the old TV clips of concerts, etc. and I just do not get it. I guess he's just not my cup of tea.

James Taylor, on the other hand, can basically do no wrong IMHO.

Oh, and I wasn't even a twinkle in my mother's eye when these recordings were made.

You just haven't listened to enough Neil Young

.