Mark and David

[the visitor]

Very interesting, Lars, thanks. And JBaent, you may very well be right about the old Dire Straits contract having expired by the time the "Sultans" collection came out. But still, if David Knopfler owns part of the copyright for those old songs, I can't see how they could take that away from him. It's only fair that he doesn't get paid for songs from the MM/LOG/BIA/OES era, of course, but he should have gotten something for the the early ones. And he probably did, I don't know. Ed Bicknell may be very smart, and Mark may just not care, but neither of them are evil, I guess.

Another thing was discussed here and there was the song "Wild West End". Not sure if I'm correct, but didn't David sort of claim that he had co-written or even written that one? And that the record sleeve should have said so? Even if that's true, he should have complained back then, of course ...

I believe that the original Dire Straits contract expired after Live at the BBC album in 1995 which was essentially a release to satisfy a certain number of albums.  So any arrangement after that would have been a new one and drawn up under new terms.

[the visitor]

don't think i set a change on 2500....think the next step is 3000, ask Jbaent :-)

What about a new thread instead of taking this one off topic....

[vgonis]

I believe that the original Dire Straits contract expired after Live at the BBC album in 1995 which was essentially a release to satisfy a certain number of albums.  So any arrangement after that would have been a new one and drawn up under new terms.

That is my understanding as well. And it came as a surprise to see only ONE song from the first two albums on the latest compilation PI.

[vgonis]

Plus I remember reading about band leaders that erased and re-recorded all instruments played by others for all the re-releases in order to NOT pay performers, a dime.
I also know about Zappa re-recording for the CD editions many drums and bass, so the original editions are quite different, but I guess that was because he was not satisfied.
Another reason is contractual bindings. Pink Floyd, re recorded Money for the Collection of dance songs, because in the USA the old contract had rights over the Dark side of the moon original recording.

[JF]

just my 2 cents about the Mark/David thing :

In the Oldfield book, J. Illsely says something like that : "I think that it has always been clear that Mark was the leader, and that the band was just here to carry his songs"

and I think that the difference between John/Pick and David is that John and Pick had immediately understood this, but not David.



An now a funny anecdote, but do not laugh at me 

on the first 2 DS albums, Mark is credited as "vocal, lead and rhythm guitars" which means of coirse that he sings, and on most of the songs that he plays 2 guitar parts : a lead one, and a rhythm one

but I must admit that at my first reading of these booklets, some 25 yeras ago, I understood that he was credited for :
1) vocal
2) lead
3) guitars
 

OK I've never been good in english, so maybe it's just me....but I think that this lapsus can be seen as the way Mark wanted to be understood 

Serioulsy, its' rather rare that guitarists are credited for lead and rhythm guitars. Most of the time, if guitarists are playing several parts they are credited for guitars....
I think that Mark really wanted to specify that he was playing most of the parts, and so that he was the leader...

It's another subject, but I've never understood why he needs other guitarists in studio, because, they always play just few uninteresting parts, Mark plays all parts you can hear at the first listen, so why don't he record all his albums just like he did for MM and KTGC ?

[Rail King]

It's another subject, but I've never understood why he needs other guitarists in studio, because, they always play just few uninteresting parts, Mark plays all parts you can hear at the first listen, so why don't he record all his albums just like he did for MM and KTGC ?

Mark is the greatest guitarist I know, but don't underestimate Richard Bennett, JF! He brings a flavour to a lot of the songs that they wouldn't otherwise have - and one that Mark couldn't just produce himself. That's the great thing about the guitar: It won't ever sound the same in the hands of somebody else, no matter how talented they are. I like Kill to Get Crimson, but I was glad he brought Richard back after that (and now Paul Franklin, too!).

[Pottel]

Was Ktgc without Richard? Can't remember that?

[holaknopfler]

Was Ktgc without Richard? Can't remember that?

Yup Mark did all the guitars himself

[vgonis]

JF I like the way you think! I can only add that the mixed dymamics, between Mark and David, as musicians and as siblings, can not be underestimated. And the fact that the leader is at the same time the bigger brother, sometimes adds to the frustration. I can only say, that I would have loved to listen to David's composition with the band. But it is already history that can't be changed.
As for the guitar parts, no matter how I love MK, I think that every guitarist has his unique tone, that adds to the music. I think when MK interacts with other talented musicians, the result is much better.
By the way, I don't think that the reason he is credited for rhythm guitars as well, is because he plays rhythm guitars and adds overdubs as well. But David and Hal has contributed greatly and it is a shame to think otherwise.   

[Pottel]

now i understand why it is my least favourite album, it misses that little extra...

[JF]

JF I like the way you think! I can only add that the mixed dymamics, between Mark and David, as musicians and as siblings, can not be underestimated. And the fact that the leader is at the same time the bigger brother, sometimes adds to the frustration. I can only say, that I would have loved to listen to David's composition with the band. But it is already history that can't be changed.
As for the guitar parts, no matter how I love MK, I think that every guitarist has his unique tone, that adds to the music. I think when MK interacts with other talented musicians, the result is much better.
By the way, I don't think that the reason he is credited for rhythm guitars as well, is because he plays rhythm guitars and adds overdubs as well. But David and Hal has contributed greatly and it is a shame to think otherwise.   

sorry disagree here 

I don't think that the straits albums would have sound MUCH different if Hal or David have never been there

of course each guitarist has his unique tone, and of course interact with others is nice

I love Richard's playing on live roadrunning, but sorry to say : on studio albums like shangri-la or STP, there's only few songs where you can hear him distincly

an exemple : on Boom like that, Mark "allowed" Richard only to play just strumming chords on the chorus. All other three guitars (lead LP, rhythm silvertone, rhythm tele with THAT lick) are Mark.
same for David : all "notables" parts are payed by Mark.
If you listen to setting me up or southbound again , what do you hear ? David's guitar ?......I don't think so...

What I say isn't against peoples or musicians, it's just the fact that the typical guitar parts are ALMOST all played by Mark.
another example on clenaning my gun : Guy says that Richard plays the rhythm on 12 strings. Yes, but Marks is playing a rhythm part too, on 12 strings...so what brings Richard's "contribution" here ?
If Mark wanted absolutely to play the rhythm part, he could have played it on both channels, not just let Richard a "mimic" part.


A little bit the same with Gilmour : do you notice a notable difference on the wall because Lee Rotenour played a rhythm part on ONE song ?
do you notice a notable difference on Animals because Snowy White played some guitar ?



BUT, of course if you listen to Infidels, you can hear that 2 great guitarists are playing together, it's obvious to your ears,

but as far as MK studio albums...I don't thnki so IMHO

now i understand why it is my least favourite album, it misses that little extra...

would you say the same thing about Making Movies ? 




My opinion is that Mark could have played all guitars in studio, and have hired musicians for tours, and I think it wouldn't have changed his studio records sound at all, especially during DS days, as it was really the case

[Fletch]

Mark has mentioned in interviews that he likes to get he odd lesson from Richard, which I always understand as meaning - Richard is strong on his music theory and Mark doesn't mind absorbing some new theory in small doses ?

[Pottel]

whatever, just do not like KTGC

[vgonis]

JF your point about rhythm guitar is well put. But I still wonder then, why David was ousted during the MM rehearsals, for not trying enough. It means that something was expected of him, which he has probably delivered on the two previous albums. And the demos, of the first album, that I absolutely adore, were recorded more or less live, and who's playing what is obvious.

[JF]

It means that something was expected of him, which he has probably delivered on the two previous albums

Yes you are right, and I wonder too, because I don't understand what was exepected of him, as Mark could have played all parts since the beginning
so maybe the fact that he wasn't trying enough was just a pretext for Mark to oust him, something he wanted to do since the beginning...  
Ok it's a bit harsh, but we all know that David wasn't ousted just because he couldn't or didn't want to play some guitar parts...
the REAL reason is of course more than that

And the demos, of the first album, that I absolutely adore, were recorded more or less live, and who's playing what is obvious.

Yes and no, it depends on which demos  
remember they weren't recorded at the same time, in the same way

several songs have 3 guitars with Mark playing rhythm and lead (e.g. setting me up or eastbound train), so before the album recording, it was already a Mark's habitude

Mark has mentioned in interviews that he likes to get he odd lesson from Richard, which I always understand as meaning - Richard is strong on his music theory and Mark doesn't mind absorbing some new theory in small doses ?

I agree. Richard's influence is maybe more in human interaction, giving ideas and advices or such things, than in "real" playing and adding his tones or sounds to the songs.

but of course there's some exceptions :

summer of love (who would have bet it was him playing the lead if we haven't seen on video ?)
sucker row (yes I know many people believe that it is Mark on lead, but Chuck Ainlay had listed Mark on acoustic and Richard on MK-sig-strat on this song....)
let's see you (the driving rhyhtm, I like it !)
Daddy's gone to Knoxville (the lap steel)
bouzouki on many songs
...

and of course live !


ok ok ok...I posted arguments against myself !  

In fact, my opinion was more about DS days than solo days.
this is the MK paradox : his band was more a solo thing, and his solo albums are more collaborative !