Tonight Extended???

Talk about Randy Rhoads here.

Moderators: Randy Perry, The Flying Dutchman, Stiltzkin, skezza, Trigger

User avatar
stealaway
Mass Poster
Posts: 593
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 1:35 pm
Location: Europe

Re: Tonight Extended???

Post by stealaway »

How long would those faded songs be in their full-lenght...? Maybe Randy soloed for minute or so in the end of them, not too öong I guess... I wonder what he would´ve played on "Little Dolls" besides that "scratch solo"...
Mikel
User avatar
DMRX
Mass Poster
Posts: 830
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 10:20 pm

Re: Tonight Extended???

Post by DMRX »

When they were Tracking it,the way the Drum & Bass Goes during the Fade-Out They Coulda Jammed on that Groove fror awhile!!They prolly just played it til it felt Right??Ive played Drums All my life & Know that they coulda carried Tonight for 20 mins eeasily,but I dont Think so.Mabey an Extra Few & Yes I think Bob did mention that like 10 years ago in some Interview
User avatar
Ritchie
Mass Poster
Posts: 739
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:17 pm
Location: Atlanta

Re: Tonight Extended???

Post by Ritchie »

I think what you have to take into consideration is that the Ampex 456 2" tape they ( most probably ) used in the studio was very expensive and to "waste" 20 mins is out of the question ! Max would've hit the STOP button long before that .... the jam may have gone on for 20 mins , but not the recording , perhaps 1 - 2 minutes at most .
................................................................Image...............................................................................
User avatar
Geo Sav
Mass Poster
Posts: 1053
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 8:16 pm

Re: Tonight Extended???

Post by Geo Sav »

1 minute or 20 minutes. I would take any of them. even alternate solos. Who cares. I would love to hear more. :wink:
Gus
Cool Member
Posts: 170
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 6:50 pm

Re: Tonight Extended???

Post by Gus »

Does anyone know why they never played 'Tonight' live? :? Great song, and another chance for Randy to shine, but didn't happen.
User avatar
Tito
Mass Poster
Posts: 1687
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 9:45 pm

Re: Tonight Extended???

Post by Tito »

ozzy most likely couldnt pull it off as far as the notes involved im thinking..
Gus
Cool Member
Posts: 170
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 6:50 pm

Re: Tonight Extended???

Post by Gus »

Tito wrote:ozzy most likely couldnt pull it off as far as the notes involved im thinking..
Thanks Tito. It's a pity. I wish Ozzy had've just done it even once while someone was taping. Even if he botched the vocal Randy would've still taken care of business 8)
User avatar
P C M
Cool Member
Posts: 289
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 12:33 am
Location: Toronto,Ontario. Canada

Re: Tonight Extended???

Post by P C M »

Tito wrote:ozzy most likely couldnt pull it off as far as the notes involved im thinking..
Agreed. I have a helluva time trying to myself.20 years ago,I coulda 1 upped it for sure but I don't think it would suit the song. As they (Blizzard) expressed.....the magic. I'm more upset at the fact that Ozzy couldn't do a dry run on this song (being somewhat sober/somewhat drug free,toned up) and at least sang like he did after Randy's passing. I think if he slowed down on the partying (like the dvd from BATM and TUS) stuff,Randy would have gone out on the road for 1 more try - only after he got his degree. It's a shame that Ozzy never really did that much for Randy during his time with him live wise.

Sorry,just my opinion.
Image
User avatar
Tito
Mass Poster
Posts: 1687
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 9:45 pm

Re: Tonight Extended???

Post by Tito »

your welcome gus!!!and very true pcm!!!!
User avatar
Cryptic Night
Mass Poster
Posts: 623
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 7:39 am
Location: My House

Re: Tonight Extended???

Post by Cryptic Night »

Gus wrote:
Tito wrote:ozzy most likely couldnt pull it off as far as the notes involved im thinking..
Thanks Tito. It's a pity. I wish Ozzy had've just done it even once while someone was taping. Even if he botched the vocal Randy would've still taken care of business 8)
There's Ozzy's vocals, but there's also the changing guitars too. I just really couldn't see them doing that song live.

IMO, there were two reasons they never did YCKRR, Tonight, and DOAM (The song).

1. Ozzy's vocals

2. The changing guitars. As much as I love Randy, I just couldn't see him being able to pull of the change of sounds from those songs live. I mean, for the most part, he practically had to re-write Goodbye To Romance to be able to play it live. (He had to combine all the layers, and such, and change it slightly in some areas)

It's possible he COULD have pulled the changes off. He did a hell of a job on Goodbye To Romance, after all.

Also, there's a third reason I don't think they would have done YCKRR and Tonight, the mood. Goodbye To Romance was there ballad, and their only "slow" song. They were trying to create the mood of a medieval time (With carnival-like nonsense going around, like the hanging of the midget, and the animal parts being thrown around) not a romantic era. So, doing too many ballads wouldn't have given them this "dark" image, but would have given them the image that they were sad or something along those lines.

I could be 100% right, or 100% wrong on that, but those reasons are the most likely. (There's a good chance that all 3 reasons are why they never played Tonight)
Like the lunar and solar lights, humanity's unaligned, undefined.
Gus
Cool Member
Posts: 170
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 6:50 pm

Re: Tonight Extended???

Post by Gus »

Cryptic Night wrote:
Gus wrote:
Tito wrote:ozzy most likely couldnt pull it off as far as the notes involved im thinking..
Thanks Tito. It's a pity. I wish Ozzy had've just done it even once while someone was taping. Even if he botched the vocal Randy would've still taken care of business 8)
There's Ozzy's vocals, but there's also the changing guitars too. I just really couldn't see them doing that song live.

IMO, there were two reasons they never did YCKRR, Tonight, and DOAM (The song).

1. Ozzy's vocals

2. The changing guitars. As much as I love Randy, I just couldn't see him being able to pull of the change of sounds from those songs live. I mean, for the most part, he practically had to re-write Goodbye To Romance to be able to play it live. (He had to combine all the layers, and such, and change it slightly in some areas)

It's possible he COULD have pulled the changes off. He did a hell of a job on Goodbye To Romance, after all.

Also, there's a third reason I don't think they would have done YCKRR and Tonight, the mood. Goodbye To Romance was there ballad, and their only "slow" song. They were trying to create the mood of a medieval time (With carnival-like nonsense going around, like the hanging of the midget, and the animal parts being thrown around) not a romantic era. So, doing too many ballads wouldn't have given them this "dark" image, but would have given them the image that they were sad or something along those lines.

I could be 100% right, or 100% wrong on that, but those reasons are the most likely. (There's a good chance that all 3 reasons are why they never played Tonight)
Thanks Cryptic,
You make some interesting points. Would've been something just to see them attempt it, sink or swim.
User avatar
Geo Sav
Mass Poster
Posts: 1053
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 8:16 pm

Re: Tonight Extended???

Post by Geo Sav »

I think for DOAM it was the many guitar parts but the others were cause of Ozzys voice.Randy says something about DOAM on the seminar audio when he showed how to play it. I still think he could have pulled it off. He was a perfectionist and didnt think it sounded good enough.
User avatar
stealaway
Mass Poster
Posts: 593
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 1:35 pm
Location: Europe

Re: Tonight Extended???

Post by stealaway »

Randy would have pulled them off!!! He was THE guitarplayer and musician!!! :wink:
It would´ve been really interesting to hear those other songs from DOAMM... :mrgreen:
Mikel
User avatar
Geo Sav
Mass Poster
Posts: 1053
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 8:16 pm

Re: Tonight Extended???

Post by Geo Sav »

I agree.
Post Reply