Quote
guitarbastard
1984 - 2009 good and still better then most of the other crap...

well, there you have it - the stones crap better than others...comes with practice, i guess

I have always thought of the bands as 3 different periods.

The Brian Jones era - which is the purist & rawest of all the incarnations. They were very adventurous and they were breaking new ground with each new album.

The Mick Taylor era - They took what the learned from the previous era, & became the greatest rock & roll band in the world. More of a guitar band, the rawness gave way to technical excellence, they didn't take as many chances as before but they were the masters in which all other bands strive to be.

The Ron Wood era - This is more of the legend era. They had climbed to the top of the mountain and didn't have anything more to prove. They were looser, & live appearances overtook the studio albums. Much more of a spectacle.

This doesn't mean that any one era is better than any other, it is really just the natural progression of a great band that has been able to endure over 40 years.

It's so very lonely, you're 2,000 Light Years from home

That music lovers with great love for this band, and who have such varied preferences regarding time periods, song lyrics, musical sound, and live performances speaks volumes about the depth and greatness of what they have given us all.

because it was

the golden era. 1963-73. mostly hit or miss but very experimental.

the silver era. 1974-86. less experimental, sounding more conservative but mostly good stuff.

the bronze era. 1989-2007. less frequent recordings but still enough that are good.

Love all eras, maybe the "pop" era of 66-67 best.

Its ALL good!!

Never like the Stones from 78 till DW. Weak tunes. Lame live shows. Keith and Ronnie just about getting by. Saw the Stones too mamy times during this time period. It was great at the time but can't hold a candle to anything before or after.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-07-29 03:06 by More Hot Rocks.

Quote
wee bobby lennox
the golden era.
.

the silver era.
.

the bronze era. .

Uh-huh.

And so how was Comic Con, Bobby?

Quote
Big Al
Albums aside, I still believe their greatest era singles-wise, is from 1964-1969 – basically, their Decca years.

They may have went on to release the likes of Sticky Fingers and Exile On Main St, but that great run of singles that yielded such classics as The Last Time, Paint It, Black, Lets Spend The Night Together, We Love You, Jumpin’ Jack Flash, et al, is The Rolling Stones, IMO.

I'll go along with that, particularly since Brown Sugar and Wild Horses are both vintage '69. And since those two tracks belong to Abkco, they basically have the rights to all the singles that really matter.

1962-1983 is when the Stones were a working band and all of the incarnations are excellent. However starting with Jumping Jack Flash and ending with the 1973 tour of Europe these guys were untouchable there is nary a bad song to come out in that period and I include GHS in there its one of the most underated albums ever made.

Quote
slew
I include GHS in there its one of the most underated albums ever made.

Totally agree!!

I can understand the 68-72 label as from BB - EOMS the studio albums were all superb but I don't agree that was there peak, after exile the next 2 studio albums were indeed a big drop in qaulity but they began to rise again with Black and Blue and got back up to peak again with Some Girls fell with ER back up with TY and so on. bit of a rollercoaster.

Quote
nanker phelge

Quote
slew
I include GHS in there its one of the most underated albums ever made.

Totally agree!!

I don't.

Whatever you think of GHS personally, it doesn't even come close to their recorded output from '68-'72. You can't compare the classic opening tracks of the previous four studio albums to the slow,go-nowhere turd "Dancing With Mr. D."

The They Can Do No Wrong Golden Era ended in '72.

Quote
Ket
I can understand the 68-72 label as from BB - EOMS the studio albums were all superb but I don't agree that was there peak, after exile the next 2 studio albums were indeed a big drop in qaulity but they began to rise again with Black and Blue and got back up to peak again with Some Girls fell with ER back up with TY and so on. bit of a rollercoaster.

That's true, but the peaks they've hit SINCE Exile were never quite as high as the peak they hit WITH Exile.

Quote
loog droog

Quote
nanker phelge

Quote
slew
I include GHS in there its one of the most underated albums ever made.

Totally agree!!

I don't.

Whatever you think of GHS personally, it doesn't even come close to their recorded output from '68-'72. You can't compare the classic opening tracks of the previous four studio albums to the slow,go-nowhere turd "Dancing With Mr. D."

The They Can Do No Wrong Golden Era ended in '72.

I think you can extend the Golden Era to '73 based on the quality of the live shows they played that year, which some fans rate even higher than the '72 shows. But GHS, even though it was recorded in '72, can't be ranked as being among their greatest albums. It's certainly better than the two that came after it, but the drop-off in quality from Exile to GHS is staggering.

GHS is not Exile but it is nonetheless a great album. A lot of quality songs.

Great thread.

I have to say that after Keith lost his baby,beating out jail and coming out of dope... finding a brother to play with, jagger with a new girlfriend or whatever made the 77 - 83 period special, good vibes can be felt from the speakers. The band always rough on the edges, with the greatest rhythm section in history finding its cool... Its a totally different sound but I do believe the sounds from Paris could very well be the closest to the Stones soul. No one can´t deny how special these sessions are.

Exile is my favorite album. I also love Aftermath... Sticky Fingers...The two guitar attack on yas yas out is unparalled... but the coolest sound , the coolest Stones are in Paris 77 - 83, with a lot of credit to Chris kimsey for mixing the stuff, and also digging out those gems from previous sessions for the Tattoo You album.

Quote
His Majesty
I love 1963 - 1968/9 and I think the Mick Taylor period in particular is very overrated.

I don't think the Taylor period is overrated. To me, it's more that the Brian Jones period and in particular Brian's contribution is underrated. Often the classic Stones songs from that period are the ones where Brian Jones features, eg Little Red Rooster (slide), Ruby Tuesday (recorder), Under My Thumb (marimba) Paint It Black (sitar). Not to mention his superb harp playing.

I can understand that you don't agree that this is the Golden Era.
What I don't get is that you can say that you just don't understand why everyone thinks it is the Golden Era.

Spot on, Palace! I'm sure that everyone has their very special Stones experience and therefore different takes at what might be their greatest period, but if you'd ask any unbiased, horse sensed observer, I'm pretty sure he'd most certainly come to the conclusion that 68-73 indeed is their most artistically successful period. And it's easy to see why, because they had really come into their own by then PLUS they were still relevant.

Before, they may have been even more relevant as a phenomen, but artistically they were - for the most part - still some kind of raunchous copycat band (a R&B Oasis, so to speak), and after, well, they were still great, still maturing as musicians, but - for the most part - not relevant anymore.



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 2009-07-30 17:46 by Greenblues.

true golden era===1980-2005

STONES JAM!! MICKEYS RULES!!! (burp) NADER IN 2016!!!!! GO GIANTS!!

Quote
tatters

I think you can extend the Golden Era to '73 based on the quality of the live shows they played that year, which some fans rate even higher than the '72 shows. But GHS, even though it was recorded in '72, can't be ranked as being among their greatest albums. It's certainly better than the two that came after it, but the drop-off in quality from Exile to GHS is staggering.

It's that staggering drop off that marks the end of the Golden Age.

The Golden Age isn't all about Mick Taylor, since he entered the band post- JJF, Beggar's Banquet, and after most of Let It Bleed was recorded. Nicky Hopkins certainly made a major contribution, while Jimmy Miller was perhaps the most significant non-Stone involved.

But the most important architects of the Golden Age were Mick and Keith who wrote the songs.

There would continue to be other peaks and great moments, such as the '73 live shows, Some Girls album, etc. etc.

But that unbroken string of classic material that was released from '68 through '72 was all no peaks and no valleys. During that period they could do no wrong.

That staggering drop off in quality ended it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-07-31 07:15 by loog droog.

Because...

(a) Mick and Keith were in peak of their creativity - in 1968 they found their own voice how to write, and in the four following studio albums (plus the singles) are full of masterful rock tunes. For example, the sequence of "Jumpin' Jack Flash", "Honky Tonk Women" and "Brown Sugar" is perhaps the strongest three singles ever released. And they are just icing the cake... (the actual signature masterpieces of the era are buried on the albums: "Sympathy", "Gimme Shelter"...)

(b) Because all those FIVE albums (don't dare to forget YA-YA's!) are dated very well; each of them is an universal masterpiece, and to be listened in its own terms without any "excuses", no matter "capturing the climate" or anything. Plus each of them is unique and having an identity of its own. As where as prior BEGGARS albums, no matter they being more "raw" or "adventurous", are very much albums of their date - and having ideas and songs that have not dated so well, especially the ones Mick and Keith were desperately trying to follow the trends (AFTERMATH, BUTTONS, SATANIC MAJESTIES). They are "interesting" and inspired but not always hit the mark. But from BEGGARS to EXILE, like said here, they just couldn't do wrong.

(c) It looks like the classical rock period culminated in the late-60's and early 70's - the whole progression from the 50's through the Beatlemania, Dylan, the recognition of the blues - and black music over-all, hippies, etc. The whole 'scene' was matured by then - thanks to pros like Jimi Hendric, Zeppelin etc. the quality of music, and especially how to present that, was in another level, and The Stones reflected the times very well - the whole genre and generation that once was inspired by Elvis and Chuck Berry was on peak.

(d) The Stones - like many of their 60's contemporaries - lost the momentum in the seventies thanks to drugs, money, age, lazyness, the emergency of new acts, etc - which was natural, and even though they did dome great albums (read: SOME GIRLS and rest of the Marconi sessions) they never reached the natural height in creativitywise again. It's been "best since EXILE" ever since. By the 80s's the band had cemented its sound, and they seem to rest on their musical canon created during the 'golden era'. But it is creativitywise always the relation of a copy to an original, and somehow the original always wins the comparison. The magic of, say, "Jumping Jack Flash" or "Brown Sugar" or "Street Fighting Man" can never to be repeated.

(e) As a live act, I think the golden era needs to be extended further - perhaps even to 1982. Once hitting the road again in 1969, they evolved and changed interestingly through the following twelve years; the change of the guitarist just kept it more fresh, and gave them another kick.

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2009-07-31 13:35 by Doxa.

it's mainly a matter of taste.

68/73 definately superb but 77/83 I like best personally Place Pigalle 4CD sessions, 5CD Some Girls outtakes and Black and Blue outtakes are one of my all time favorite recordings. Love the guitars, the dirty sound (whether they play Fool to Cry, Disco Music or Lies, I love it all)

From 89 the Stones developed again in a new direction, one i don't like. Sound too clean, hardly Keith/Ron as back ground vocalists, Chuck with his shitty plunky piano and a much less prominent role for the guitars.

The early years are indeed awesome! I love the attitude of those early albums. I always feel that the period is highly underrated on this board as to how much attention it gets in the threads. My favorite period.

The '68-'72 period is of course golden because of al the great songs they wrote and therefor albums made but I also like so many others here am a sucker for the '77-'83 era for the same reasons everybody here are stating. It's like the early years again with the awesome guitars :-)

Cheers,
Wuudy

<(b) Because all those FIVE albums (don't dare to forget YA-YA's!) are dated very well; each of them is an universal masterpiece, and to be listened in its own terms without any "excuses", no matter "capturing the climate" or anything. Plus each of them is unique and having an identity of its own. As where as prior BEGGARS albums, no matter they being more "raw" or "adventurous", are very much albums of their date - and having ideas and songs that have not dated so well, especially the ones Mick and Keith were desperately trying to follow the trends (AFTERMATH, BUTTONS, SATANIC MAJESTIES). They are "interesting" and inspired but not always hit the mark. But from BEGGARS to EXILE, like said here, they just couldn't do wrong.>

Agree, except for Aftermath, which I think still stands on solid ground, and is a classic as well, imo.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Agree, except for Aftermath, which I think still stands on solid ground, and is a classic as well, imo.

I totally love AFTERMATH but at least the UK version (I always think of) gets a bit boring and repitive towards the end (and to be sure, it is the "B-side" I am talking about, because I always consider the album as a vinyl one...) Some of the songs are really fillers ("What To Do", "Think", "Take it or Leave It", etc.), a kind of easy-listening pop songs Mick and Keith didn't consider to suit for the Stones two years earlier, but gave them to others. The US version is perhaps more solid, but I have never been familiar with it.

- Doxa

JJF
Beggar's Banquet
HTW
Hyde Park show
LIB
69 American tour
Ya-Ya's
70 UK tour
Launch of Rolling Stones Records
Brown Sugar
SF
Hot Rocks
More Hot Rocks
Tumbling Dice
EOM
72 Tour of America
Angie
GHS
73 European tour

This is a band at the height of their powers! What more can anyone say. A classic single before each album, 5 PHENOMENAL albums plus a good one in GHS, fantastoc live shows. And spare the Mick Taylor aspect this is Mick and Keith's golden era. Taylor was an integral part but he did not make this era. he is not even on JJF, BB, HTW and plays one track on LIB.

68-72beats the heck out of any other era, 78-81 very good minus ER,94-97 very good, 63 -67 excellent