Knowing we have a new Stones album coming soon, some have commented on past records, particularly "Satanic Majesties"...
OK, it was made in a drug haze, but ..its got great songs on it, imho.
Citadel rocks! how about She's A Rainbow, and the 2000 songs, 2000 Man, and 2000 Light Years...
only posting this because I've heard Satanic Majesties dissed many times, but if it's because it has some tracks that aren't exactly great, can't you say that about most of their albums? And the original cover was fantastic!
DR

I think most Stones fans agree with your sentiments. It was just (and still is) considered a creative misstep more than a outright mistake. There are some great songs to be found for sure, as well as a few embarassing ones. It's documented that Brian was very against this direction they were taking as he wanted them to stay close to their roots.

I think it's great except for the See What Happens track. 2000 Man is prophetic & hilarious, there's social commentary, humor, & (more lysergic this time) lyricism (Shes a Rainbow), a haunting & dark 2000 Light Years, the droning "Gomper" and some great contributions from Brian throughout. Delete that crappy 7:58 self indulgence and you have a fine, smart album.

I liked Satanics, an important part of Stones history and a sign of the times. Now Metamorphasis on the other hand, ...... uhh!

Ha, I love Satantic and Metamorphosis. Which leads me to my next topic...

Ironic thing with this Brian's attitude against the sort of experimentation and psychedelia of Satanic Majesties, is that he was the only one who had some talent to make some convincing results in that direction... Without him the result would have been even worse. There is no wonder that Mick wanted to follow the trends, but I have always wondered what made Keith do that...

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-03-16 19:14 by Rorty.

I like it as well. It marks a point in their history, mainly the acid they were taking but there are some great songs on here. And the other two songs which could have been on this record Dandelin and We Love You are also very good. In fact replace the two weakest songs with those tunes and you have a very good record. All in all, people tend to bash things that are different and this is clearly different but I think it is a good album. I prefer it to that goofy crap the Beatles were doing, even though some tend to compare this with Sgt. Peppers.

The Music.....

Think how good it would have been if they managed to place the following on it and deleted some of the clunkers:

We Love You (Feels like it would "fit", regardless of release date)
JJ Flash (Same here)
Child of the Moon

For someone who is supposedly a blues purist, Brian sure was interested in the mellotron (throughout TSMR)and integrating Moroccan/Arabic music into the Stones. This is really the last album he made major contributions to THROUGHOUT (as opposed to BB, where he makes solid creative contributions to about half - NE, DD, maybe PW, SFM, SC.

and it has "In Another Land"...that a whole topic in itself! Bill managed to get one on! the trippy verses, then the funk comes in on the chorus...

I think "Child of The Moon" has some Majesties influences, but I take "JJFlash" to be a Beggars Banquet era song. Don't belong to Majesties ideology, but being quite a dramatical transition from that era. But "We LOve You" and "Dandelion" would have made the album better, but perhaps they were too radio friendly and easy listening to the concept of Majesties...

- Doxa

smr....shows how great the rolling stones are.... i don't even know how you could even write this? i got the sony remaster.... just listen to gomper... i don't know why you don't like it?
most of the songs are AMAZING.....2000 LIGHT YEARS, SHE A RAINBOW, 2000 MAN AND CITADEL ARE SOME OF THE BEST MUSIC EVER DONE..not just by the stones but by anyone! gomper,sing this song, in another land, lantern and on with the show
round out a very interesting round of tracks...

i think it gave the stones the power to show the world that it could do something more that just the basic rock/blues record.. most bands including the beatles could never in a million years written a more complex album like tsmr..

i do think with out brian, they couldn't have done it either...brian had the gifts to pull it off...

It's a fun psychedelic curio,
just enjoy it on those terms
and you'll be fine with it.

well im glad they made it...beause i like it

I agree with davido. If you look at it that way, it's fun except for See What Happens.

The thing that bothers me is how slavishly they try to be the Beatles. I mean, Something Happened to ME always bothered me because of Mick's whistling and the real physcedelic stuff on SMR bothers me the same way. But songs like the Lantern, the 2000s, Citadel(always been a favorite--the guitar is awesome), Rainbow are great. If the Lantern was reworked a little , it could have made it to Beggars. I would have loved to hear We Love You, Dandelion, and Child of the Moon on SMR....That;s a great idea.

As with most Stones discs...they are never afraid to try something new. You can't really predict what they are going to do next.

It isn't from my taste sorry. I like She's A Rainbow, 2000 songs, Citadel and anymore!!

i don't think the stones were trying to copy ther beatles...they were both doing it at the same time... in the studio.. keith said that they were doing it because everyone was one doing it at the time... he said it was in everyone's mind.. just like when country/rock was in... or mod rock...etc.

Well,
I think that some of the stuff on SMR is a lot like SGT Pepper. The beginning of She's like a Rainbow and most of On with the Show are heavily influenced by the Beatles. It's the only time I really saw the paralell between the 2 bands

Keith of course is completely straight

sure the stones were not going to be left behind.....but if you look at, we love you, ruby tuesday, dandelion or child of the moon..that was all released before the beatles stuff...
the stones did, we love you, when the beatles were still recording ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE...
anyway i think they were both into the new hippie music...
but i really don't think the stones were just in it to copy the beatles..
if that were the case we would have seen more sweet love type songs coming out from the stones..

i also think the stones album was much deeper... but with that said...if not for brian, that album would have died!

whats wrong with it?

Answer in two simple words - "it's shit"

It's the Stones trying to be something they're not. It's the Stones jumping on a bandwagon on which they never really belonged. It's the Stones trying to be cool, when they already were beyond cool. It reeks of phoniness and pretentiousness.

There ARE indeed a few very good songs - the two "2000" songs plus "Shes a Rainbow". But then again on every Stones album there are a few classics

However, whereas on the Stones weaker albums the majority of songs are just OK, on Satanic Majesties they're simply bloody awful and cringeworthy.

I'm still amazed to this day the revisionism surrounding this embarrassment. The way things are going, in five years time most people will consider "Dirty Work" a classic and "Emotional Rescue" to be the band's definitive single.

well said...but you can listen to d.w. and hear it all... i agree that the stones should have stayed closer to their roots... but again if you listen to it.. try it at home tonight..ha.. there is much more to it than the d.w album..
brian jones turned in a half hearted album into sometime most band then or now could have never written. its funny a lot of people who think the stones work was just plain old simple rock and roll like the smr... a lot of people who love classical music think rock and roll is just plain simple shit!
the stones proved that they could do something more than just plain rock n roll.
i love rock music...but if your in a laid back mood then put it on! let it rock!

hot stuff wrote:
>if not for Brian, (SMR) would have died!

-That could be said of all the Stones albums he played on, including Beggar's . . .

Nothing wrong with Satanic that a tab of acid wont fix....!!!


ROCKMAN

I think there are to many comparisons being applied. It was a good album for it's day, it was in total sink with what other cutting edge bands were doing. A better question would be how it stacked up against other artists of the day as opposed to comparing it with other era Stones music.

The trick for a band is surviving experimentation. So they moved on and kept fresh. SM in it's day, Exile in another.

right on....mark.... i had it on...still sounds good to me.. put on gomper real loud....

it was my first Stones album that I bought when I was 12 years old...just a remnant of the times!

mark Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think there are to many comparisons being
> applied. It was a good album for it's day, it was
> in total sink with what other cutting edge bands
> were doing. A better question would be how it
> stacked up against other artists of the day as
> opposed to comparing it with other era Stones
> music.
>

Beatles - Sgt Pepper/Magical mystery tour
Doors - The Doors/Strange Days
Hendrix - Are you experienced/Axis bold as love
Velvet Underground & Nico
Dylan - Basement Tapes/ John Wesley Harding
Cream - Disraeli Gears
Love - Forever Changes

plus many more albums made in '67 by acts such as The Mothers, Buffalo Springfield, Jeferson Airplane etc.

The answer, IMHO - "badly"

Gazza summed it up very succinctly and accurately with two little words, and his reasoning is right on. The Beatles had done Pepper and for some reason the Stones copied it and not very well at that. Dirty Work and Steel Wheels can't be compared with this failed effort. Those were produced well past the Stones peak. Satanic was produced very near their peak, in fact their peak was about to come.

To me, the fact that JJF was released just after Satanic and marked a return to form, still makes JJF even more exciting to listen to.

Again, Gazza is very correct...a few very good songs and the rest are simply awful (lest on acid)...this is revisionism at its worst.

Having said all that, the worst Stones album is better than 97% of all rock music ever produced, so those of you who like it...enjoy!

All the excuses (drugs, distractions, drugs) in the world cant hide the fact that the "music" is shit, with a few exceptions. They tried to make a trend album and crashed and burned.What is GREAT about Majesties is that it woke up the band, they hired an ACTUAL producer, felt their backs against the wall and cranked out Beggars and half of Let It Bleed

Milo, NYC
(DO NOT) Sing this all together



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-03-17 08:30 by Milo Yammbag.