Shelter

Hu? Great news! No wonder, really. I heard one of the Fleetwood Mac guys is in this band.......

Marion, that was fantastic! I just knew the Knobs origin of Good Enough by rumor. It's great finally hearing it, and a really good jam it is too! You keep educating me in these things and I am eternally grateful! Funny how things go... Less than a year after this intense recoding was made, Good Enough was the very first taste of Mojo that we had...

Yeah, I know... life is a minefield, these days! It may comfort you to know that I was merely - and with the warmest and most well meant of intentions, at that - refering to that old quote of Tom's, cited by Gregory above. I may have forgotten the qutation marks, so for your's and everyone else's comfort, here they are: " "

Well, this was awesome!!

..emerge from the devastating wreckage created by this presidency?

Yes, speaking of nice distinctions, this is good stuff. Diplomatic may not be a good word for Ben. Well spotted nuance there, by Gregory. Certainly. Perhaps he just seems diplomatic compared to Stan. How about a gentleman and a scholar? (And an indian, sure.) No doubt Ben was always opionionated. If anything, that is key to what I preceive as him carrying the band aspect and ensign. But like you imply, he was comparatively smooth and well spoken, very clever, as it were. More over, perhaps he kept too close to the formula, for Tom. Ben the inalienable.

Or. Nothing says instant gratification or globally distributed verbal smack, like a good telegram. Besides, perhaps reading my previous post as a "complaint" about people's taste in leaders (and a global shockwave of brainpower loss in general) rather than a mere technology dis, may help remove nobody in particular from the idea of telegrams. Make no mistake, I don't blame technology for people's failure to handle it properly. Kinda like NRA don't blame guns for people occasionally missing their target.

Right! Good point! As for there being "almost never any conflict" again, harmony is a great thing, of course. Whether it being harmony within a band or within a group of professional individuals, hired by an artist for their skills and for the convenience that stems from mutual history and understanding. Again, this may not be an important difference to people, but it is to me. And I think there was a slow ongoing shift taking place in the case of TPATH. Not that Tom was never not the leader and driving force of the band, and not that these guys are just any hands, but still... In Tom's mind? Yeah, who knows if to him, they were a band with band dynamics, all the way. In his heart, I doubt it.

^ Yeah, it's almost like you read my post. Seriously though, very nicely put. Good dimension to that input, and you dress some of my thoughts in nicer words that I could've myself too! That, especially, is following through on one of the thouhgts I barely managed to hint at in my previous post. I think there is a lot to be said for this particular line of speculation. Apart from the hierarchy issues, abd personal differences, I think Stan started to have "ideas" on the music, quite early on, that he wanted Tom to reflect upon. But for most parts, and probably in an escalating manner, this desire was not met. It's also interesting that you mention Benmont, here. I definately agree that Ben too, seem to be a man - session pro that he has become, over the cause of his career - that truly and deeply valued the band aspect, when it could be had, within the realms of Mudcrutch and TPATH. More of a diplomat, true. Perhaps also more of a philospher lover of music, one who would never risk the beauty and potential of the music over strictly personal or professional/adminstrative - comparatively, in his eyes - petty issues (pun?!). Either way - again speculations - to me, I always had the sense, when TPATH enetered what I see as what may be called "the hired hands" phase of the the latter era recording sessions, Ben seems to have been the one - perhaps due to the somewhat trans-dimensional, character and quality of his instrument(s), but perhaps due to his very gentle, funny, social and diplomatic aura as well - who carried the band torch with pride, despite the cut and paste qualities of the reality that had become. In other words, Ben, to me, I think, although it's hard to put these things into words, is largely what kept the "&" fairly smooth and credible in Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers name, the one that more than most kept the vibe of there being a Heartbreakers at all beyond I Won't Back Down.

Interesting thread to bring back. The issues of Stan the man, Stan the drummer and the rest of the band's, most notably Tom's relationship to both of them, been covered in various threads over the years. But back in 2008, when this thread started, I was more of an official bbs type of guy 😲 so some of this was interesting to revisit. I really think I've said my piece on these issues many times already, but basically I agree with what people here say about the complex personality dynamics. Most of all I like Chimera's bold:ing of the word band. Like I said elsewhere, in the past, I think that aspect is key, in this and all other issues. This was a band that became a solo project with back-up, that became a band, that went back to a soloproject and so on... Tom distancing himself a little from his "hands" for each of these steps (and I'm not just talking about Tom's solo albums here, mind you), changing, if ever so little, the dynamics. A ride that Stan of all people, may not have been the best suited to take in the long run, all things considered. He was - as I understand him and apart from him being the "loud mouthed madman" character that people love and hate - quite a band guy, musically, where Tom more and more seemed bent to cultivate the obvious fact that he rose above and beyond all that. Tom and Stan were really big egos on a mission in two very different ways, and with very different tones, I would argue. Collision was inevitable. A good thing for the peace of mind of all involved, I'm sure. Musically, it's not as obvious... Yeah, I said this before too, but why not say it again: I don't personally see how Stan's trademark style would have added much to most of Tom's material on Wildflowers onwards. Or even that his unique Stan:ness was put to any use at all on ITGWO either, for that matter. With Jeff/Tom in charge of the cut and paste buttons, the drum machines and the keys to the empire, more or less any drummer could have done that gig. Him being there in person still was the big difference compared to later albums. As been stated around these boards and others before, Tom' approach to drumming changed, the way he produced his music in studio too. It may all have been a "coming home" for his artistic vision, but it meant, for all intents and purposes a switch for The Heartbreakers, a switch from TPATH, the band, to Tom Petty session musicians with benefits. (The drums just happens to be the only aspect of this that is audible to the listener, since the drummer changed). It may not mean much to some, but I think the change in character is obvious - if not sudden and easy to pin down and if not without exceptions (what was to become the last stage of Tom's creative life seem to suggest a reorientation back towards more of a band mentality again, both in songwriting and in production ideals, if very unclear to what extent that would mean him reconsidering his ideals). Either way, the drumming is the big divide for me. "Less fills", as you say. Less of a lot of things. Less temper? Less soul? It's Tom's vision that happened, and had Stan been there in the studio of the 00s, he'd just be miserable, I'm sure. At least he wouldn't have bought much Stan:ness to these records, since that is not what Tom would've wanted on there. Jeff showed Tom the backdrop machine that keeps time, and he fell in love with it. If some late 80s or 00s songs are quite imaginable with a true-to-Stan studio treatment, it's totally theoretical, since Tom was beyond that type of quality by then. Further more, going back it seems as if Stan was a problem already for Iovine. As always, it's hard to know what was personal and what was about the music, but it seems like Iovine's vision for this band had him struggle quite a lot with what to do about the drums. But the beauty is, at least to me, that he managed to use whatever spooky place Stan have had in the music's DNA since the Shelter records, and refine it and make it work quite perfectly within the contexts of his productions. That is, I'm sure he fought and worked and pulled and pushed a lot with Stan, hurt feelings on all sides. But the result being an artistic victory, probably some aspect of which they both (all) took with them for future adventures, and the records sound good and they sound band and in short, they prevailed. "We were all fingers of the same hand" as Tom puts it. Iovine didn't like Stan, supposedly, but he ultimately, rather than killing him and cutting him from the enterprise, he worked him and used him, and by doing so, helped create what is in my world the classic TPATH sound and in essence made the whole career for this band. Once that career was established, the success and riches made, when the band saw the end of the 80s, not only had personal tension reached breaking point, it was way pratctical, if artistically lazy (or bold, depending on viewpoint) to quit trying to work Stan into the blend, but rather just keep brushing him and all he stood for more and more under the carpet, till the TPATH sound one day had become something else, and all have moved on without Stan. Before long also without Howie, incidentally. It's all bound to eventually become a different game, is all I'm saying. Live - on the other hand - of course Stan could have brought a lot of nerve and excitement to a lot of the post Stan material, I'm sure. In the live context there would've have been no stopping him and Tom would perhaps even have sailed on that groove and liked such different band dynamics, classic TPATH, as it were, well enough. But that is all very hypothetical, of course, since that's obviously is not how things work. It is a sweet thought though, trying to imagine - all respect to Steve for all he brought to the band, within this aestetic dimension and era of TPATH - what some of the last few tours, with their crisp grit in the guitar, their heavy groove and all, would have sounded like if the drums were allowed to run wild a bit more, to speak with the strange voices of this band long ago.

Wonder why Twitter doubled to 280 characters, when 140 characters apparently was more than enough for one man to destroy the work done by thousands of sane men in deacades and centuries. No to mention the ruin of politeness and respect for humanity. I suppose it's fitting, really: Of all the words and conversations that can be had about our planet and our future, turns out as little as 140 character is enough to decide between do or die, and of all the riches and possibilites available to man, as little as 1% of us is enough to keep it all to themselves. The irony? We seem to want this so bad!

That's it, yeah..I think you're right!

Haha! You're right! Jeeeze... Really sorry about that. Saw it this morning, barely awake, and something must have misfired in my head.. I was certainly confused, since someone suggsted how hot and new this was, almost no views either... and I was thinking.. "Paris, what? Some kinda under the radar debut/test for the new line up" and then of course quickly thought "How strangely insulting that the first thing they do is Buckingham's Tusk!!" and "Where the heck is Mike, then??". Man, that was a blunder, no more, no less. Just blushing a little here..... At least I can count on you to point out faults, and this time you found a big one Again, sorry guys...

Ok, so this is just in.. Can't find any info on what this is really!? And what's up with Mike (and Christine) not being present? Anyway, first proof of live from the new line up and Neil and Stevie musically interacting At least something. If something strange.

Actually quite interesting... if indeed for the die hards... Sound quality is not the best and these recordings focus on Bob (no TPATH material here), and more over: they focus on the songs Bob debuted on this tour kick.off,(which turn out to be quite a few - so it's indeed a goldmine for the Bob nut, rather than the TP ditto. Still, very interesting, I think. And the way TPATH grooves on this tour is already legendary, so...

A tribute of sorts.. Tom as a part of our cultural heritage, in ways of a reference to one of his merch t-shirts..

^ Unless it was just Tom, Jeff and George hanging out after being to some other people's show, since they were obviously friends, hanging out around that general time? That could, to DH, easily be "Traveling Wilburys" hanging out "after a show." Seems like they were at a Denny's anyway. But even if the incident took place there, the song may not have been written right there and then, right.

^ Right! There it is. I thought something did not quite compute in that particular side story. Tweeter & The Monkeyman is where that is at! Thank you! Although, to me personally, for someone who is into music in any way, even someone who is just briefly familiar with Bruce Springsteen and doesn't know any of his song titles, the style, atmosphere and rambling lyrics of T&M practically scream Springsteen parody. For anyone with the slightest knowledge in the subject, T&TM just a wicked hybrid tall tale in the vein of Highway Patrolman and Johnny 99, the mentions of a "mansion on the hill", a "Jersey girl" and a "Thunder Road" kinda giving it away to anyone in doubt. It's all very clever. To miss all levels of that is quite exceptional, even for brits Harrison and Lynne. At least I think so. But it is a good story, and we love good stories! As for Zombie Zoo, I think whatever the reason for mixing it up with T&TM here, it really is a totally poetic and wonderful slip. Of course, Zombie Zoo should have been a Wilburys tune! That is genius thinking. It's so Wilburys in character that I don't know where to start. So much more so than FMF. Speaking of how I see ZZ as a song very dependent on arrangement and production, I can really hear it lifted even further given the swinging TW treatment, perhaps wee tad slower than we're used to... with Tom and Bob taking turns with the verses and Roy coming in for a thrilling and chilling "She disappears at sunrise.. I wonder where she goes..." That would be absolutely briliant. How come I never thought of that? When Tom was given the absurd verdict of "not good enough" from MCA, for FMF, perhaps he should have recognized the chance this "rejection" meant. With some extra time and hindsight on his hands, and various new friendships and collaborations - quite a madly prolific and fun time in Tom's career, one would suppose - I'm a bit surprised that all he come up with in ways of "salvaging" FMF, to satisfy the A&Rs (try to say that out loud!), was Feel A Whole Lot Better. WHAT?! It's too easy to sit here, some 30 years later and think... why didn't you shelf ZZ, with hopes that it could be used in some of the new projects (that must clearly have been under way by the time the final draft of FMF was handed in) and why didn't you put a FMF mix of the brand new, loose end, Heartbreakers/Bangles cut Watiting For Tonight on there instead? A rare opportunity to rework details and set things straight, that you don't see often. One that was sadly missed. Not that things didn't turn out great anyway, but still... I guess Tom didn't have as much second thoughts about ZZ then, as he would develop later on. Him and Jeff apparently too pleased with their original product - for good reasons too - to make even the slightest changes, that they didn't have to. Given all the opportunities at hand, Feel a Whole Lot Better, seems more like a joke than anything else. A joke the record company felt very serious and happy about, apparently. (Then again, wasn't there staff changes at MCA the time? That would perhaps have granted the original, sanse FAWLB cut of the LP its release anyway after the initial push back for some time...? Who knows. Speculations anyway.)

Sounds like great fun! As always, I get a little green when you guys get going.. From envy, that is.

Rock Israel...! That was awesome! Thank you so much for posting that! (Perhaps post it in the Documentary Thread too?) I have not seen that one in ages.. like 25+ years... so that was quite a trip down memory lane, I did not know it was still floating around. Haven't even thought about looking for it.. it just completely skipped my mind. So, thank you kindly! Goosebump moment nr 1: "You're gonna look for me in the middle of the night" (34:20 ish). Damn I miss Howie sometimes. Wish more of his stuff would be coming in loud and clear in the mix like that! Magic! 🐫🐫🐫🐫🐫

I meant to aswer this last time... but since you are asking again, I regret to say I didn't see that tour. A bit slow in my reactions, I heard some TPATH music already in the early 80s, but didn't develop a sufficient obsession until about the 1989-91 era. (That, and I was not even 10 yo when SA hit the road, living on the other side of the planet.) Either way, I do now find 1985 to be one of the most interesting and defining eras in TPATH history, heard many many live recordings and so on, and I would definately be very pleased if someone would answer your call here, and tell some stories about that tour. Here's hoping.

Oh my.. that was rough. I'm exhausted. For real. My brain hurts. Those guys screaming all over each other, constantly cutting in, interrupting (I really hate that guy in the hat now, what a jerk), babbling, over-excited.. the hands.. the background music.. the bloodpreassure.. It's all too much. I find them very annoying. Some tidbits of interesting info in there, though, so thanks for posting! Now I'm off to hunt down an aspirin... (As for Ivovine, "being on the verge of being Jimmy Iovine", I suppose Born To Run, Darkness on The Edge of Town, Easter and all that didn't count..)

Ok, I won't... 🍌

I don' t Know why the phone doesn't allow me to insert photo links now, but y'all know what it looks like... 😁 Rick 660/12 is still on my list...... It's probably there to stay...

Right. Good points. I really am after a rather general reflection here. The example of BD came to me mostly because of the lyrics and theme seem to associate ISHKI with it to some extent. Not only the raw n heavy blues riff drive. Like I said, musically they seem to have similarities in vibe, but also technical differences of course. Again, it's the combination of aesthetics and lyrics really. But BD really is just one example, and more signs of Zep inspiration in TPATH, if vague and scattered, are to be find, I think. Speaking of: Oh, how this world would need John Bonham still in it!