Yes, unfortunately I think he would have needed to use a lawyer which mystifies with their love and dedication for the roots so perhaps there's a part of the story I don't know. Dearest Kieth, I do remember his comment when his lawyers sued the pants off of The Verve for the 10 sec sample they took from a Rolling Stones Symphonic record (they forfeited 100% profits from their smash hit Bittersweet Symphony). He said "Well I mean, how were we supposed to feel, flattered?"
Unfortunately, blues musicians in the '30s only got paid by the side of a 78 they recorded, they didn't own any royalty rights, or anything like that and were frequently ripped off by record companies. I think the Stones did credit Wilkins as the writer but as Anonym0u has said any royalties wouldn't have gone to Wilkins anyway. The original version of this before the Rev Robert got religion is called "That's No Way To Get Along" & is up on YT.
@monkeytown1000 I don't think the Stones did credit Wilkins on the original Beggars Banquet (but see Anonym0u below). And while you are right generally about royalties, I note Robert Johnson somehow ended up with a hellhound lawyer who collects past due royalties from everyone.
@ralphcraddock im not saying that its the end of the world not knowing... just that i dont like people to be misinformed... thats what starts arguments thereafter.
@0coincidences point taken.the stones should have given the rev a few quid ,i am sure it would have helped him .many people today think jagger and co wrote the song.same ones who think clapton invented the blues i expect.
the original robert wilkins recordings from the 1930,s are something else as i am sure you know.
@ralphcraddock The original Beggars Banquet sleeve had the Wilkins credited, but was changed before it went to print. A music publisher connected to Wilkin's label, Vocalion, had stolen the collecting rights to this song. So, either way, Wilkins wouldn't have been paid.
@ralphcraddock I wouldn't put it past most rock artists to knowingly exploit the authors of roots music. But if you look at this history of American blues you will find that the Stones were a boon to the careers of many great artists who had been relegated to playing in obscurity, or driving buses...
this definitely was not recorded in the 80's. that's not the way to get along (the original title of the song) was probably recorded in the 1920's or early 1930's
his son might of recorded a version in the 80's tho. john wilkins i believe is his name... but this sounds more like robert.
@ignatzly which probably means it was reprinted or it was some type of greatest hits or he re-recorded it during the traditional blues revival of the 60's. he was playing well up to the 80's actually but prodigal son is one of his oldest songs. the rolling stones covered it in the 60's. actually it says "original 1964 recordings" so it was recorded in 1964 and not the 80's. and which means it is a re-recording of it.
"During the 1960s blues revival the "Reverend" Robert Wilkins was "rediscovered" by blues enthusiasts Dick and Louisa Spottswood, making appearances at folk festivals and recording his gospel blues for a new audience. These include the 1964 Newport Folk Festival; his performance of "Prodigal Son" there was included on the Vanguard album Blues at Newport, Volume 2. His distinction was his versatility; he could play ragtime, blues, minstrel songs, and gospel with equal facility."
@0coincidences good to know. only knew and always loved the stones´version. they could´ve easily given some of their profit from "beggars banquet" to the originator.... tight cunts...
this guy's great.
brennonjohn 1 month ago
Yes, unfortunately I think he would have needed to use a lawyer which mystifies with their love and dedication for the roots so perhaps there's a part of the story I don't know. Dearest Kieth, I do remember his comment when his lawyers sued the pants off of The Verve for the 10 sec sample they took from a Rolling Stones Symphonic record (they forfeited 100% profits from their smash hit Bittersweet Symphony). He said "Well I mean, how were we supposed to feel, flattered?"
myyootube2 1 month ago
Now that you've listened to this version, listen to him singing "That's no way to get along"
1ivingHe11 1 month ago
in fact it wasn't in 1924 but in 1929, sorry...
theincredibledede 2 months ago
@ ralphcraddock
Unfortunately, blues musicians in the '30s only got paid by the side of a 78 they recorded, they didn't own any royalty rights, or anything like that and were frequently ripped off by record companies. I think the Stones did credit Wilkins as the writer but as Anonym0u has said any royalties wouldn't have gone to Wilkins anyway. The original version of this before the Rev Robert got religion is called "That's No Way To Get Along" & is up on YT.
monkeytown1000 3 months ago
@monkeytown1000 I don't think the Stones did credit Wilkins on the original Beggars Banquet (but see Anonym0u below). And while you are right generally about royalties, I note Robert Johnson somehow ended up with a hellhound lawyer who collects past due royalties from everyone.
CroatAndNettles 2 months ago
da beast in em
shannonandsheila1 6 months ago
is it played on a 12 strings guitar?
operalover67 6 months ago
brilliant and best version ever
rickydicky100 7 months ago 8
when and where robert wilkins recorded this does not matter,its brilliant.
ralphcraddock 8 months ago
@ralphcraddock im not saying that its the end of the world not knowing... just that i dont like people to be misinformed... thats what starts arguments thereafter.
0coincidences 8 months ago
@0coincidences point taken.the stones should have given the rev a few quid ,i am sure it would have helped him .many people today think jagger and co wrote the song.same ones who think clapton invented the blues i expect.
the original robert wilkins recordings from the 1930,s are something else as i am sure you know.
ralphcraddock 8 months ago 5
@ralphcraddock Yeah this is considered the Sanctified version right?
sackyhack89 8 months ago
@ralphcraddock The original Beggars Banquet sleeve had the Wilkins credited, but was changed before it went to print. A music publisher connected to Wilkin's label, Vocalion, had stolen the collecting rights to this song. So, either way, Wilkins wouldn't have been paid.
Anonym0u 5 months ago
@ralphcraddock I wouldn't put it past most rock artists to knowingly exploit the authors of roots music. But if you look at this history of American blues you will find that the Stones were a boon to the careers of many great artists who had been relegated to playing in obscurity, or driving buses...
Anonym0u 5 months ago
@Anonym0u yes you are right,
ralphcraddock 5 months ago
@ralphcraddock in fact Robert recorded that song in 1924 (at least that's the earliest version I have)
theincredibledede 2 months ago
@theincredibledede yes you are right, i just like this version.
ralphcraddock 2 months ago
this definitely was not recorded in the 80's. that's not the way to get along (the original title of the song) was probably recorded in the 1920's or early 1930's
his son might of recorded a version in the 80's tho. john wilkins i believe is his name... but this sounds more like robert.
0coincidences 9 months ago
The album cover is from 1964
ignatzly 9 months ago
@ignatzly which probably means it was reprinted or it was some type of greatest hits or he re-recorded it during the traditional blues revival of the 60's. he was playing well up to the 80's actually but prodigal son is one of his oldest songs. the rolling stones covered it in the 60's. actually it says "original 1964 recordings" so it was recorded in 1964 and not the 80's. and which means it is a re-recording of it.
0coincidences 8 months ago
"During the 1960s blues revival the "Reverend" Robert Wilkins was "rediscovered" by blues enthusiasts Dick and Louisa Spottswood, making appearances at folk festivals and recording his gospel blues for a new audience. These include the 1964 Newport Folk Festival; his performance of "Prodigal Son" there was included on the Vanguard album Blues at Newport, Volume 2. His distinction was his versatility; he could play ragtime, blues, minstrel songs, and gospel with equal facility."
0coincidences 8 months ago
@0coincidences good to know. only knew and always loved the stones´version. they could´ve easily given some of their profit from "beggars banquet" to the originator.... tight cunts...
bluntNshort 8 months ago
I have been looking for this forever! Thank you so very much
ignatzly 9 months ago