Quote
Greenblues

Quote
Doxa
Murray had a point but I guess we could trace "no significance" argument at least to IT'S ONLY ROCK'N'ROLL, perhaps even to GOATS HEAD SOAP (as I recall right, those were their best sellers by then).

- Doxa

Yeah, absolutely. I'd pick Star Star and Angie as the first signs of insignifance, even if the latter was a really well crafted song. With Angie it's the first time,
that Jagger seems to be acting his part. It's more gloss and showbiz than moving ballad (still completely irresistable, though, as a tune). So it's great fun to listen to Angie and cherish it's hooks, but it's hard to relate to it as anything else but a pop song.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
Greenblues

Quote
Doxa
Murray had a point but I guess we could trace "no significance" argument at least to IT'S ONLY ROCK'N'ROLL, perhaps even to GOATS HEAD SOAP (as I recall right, those were their best sellers by then).

- Doxa

Yeah, absolutely. I'd pick Star Star and Angie as the first signs of insignifance, even if the latter was a really well crafted song. With Angie it's the first time,
that Jagger seems to be acting his part. It's more gloss and showbiz than moving ballad (still completely irresistable, though, as a tune). So it's great fun to listen to Angie and cherish it's hooks, but it's hard to relate to it as anything else but a pop song.

I sometimes think that, but wasn't he "acting his part" on songs like "Play With Fire" and "Paint It Black" as well?

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
Gazza
Quite a few of Mike Oldfield's early albums would have simply been divided as Part I or Part II due to the listener being obliged to flip the record over.

eg Tubular Bells, Hergest Ridge and Incantations (the latter a double album featuring one track per side)

Likewise with Lou Reed's 'Metal Machine Music', of course.

Always good to read you Gazza....I did not "of course" that one,
is it a good listen? I suppose this is one way to keep people from
"youtubing" songs. Just create songs longer than the 10 minute youtube limit : )
(and yeah yeah I know we could divide them..but it defeats the Porpoise )

All very interesting........
so the Stones have no shame in only 8 songs on an album.

Side one
"Tubular Bells, Part 1" – 25:36
[edit] Side two
"Tubular Bells, Part 2" – 23:20


Side one
"Metal Machine Music, Part 1" – 16:10
[edit] Side two
"Metal Machine Music, Part 2" – 15:53
[edit] Side three
"Metal Machine Music, Part 3" – 16:13
[edit] Side four
"Metal Machine Music, Part 4" – 15:55

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Greenblues

Let me, neverless, add two thoughts to your post concering the three different eras, because I guess they also add to the topic of your former post.

As much as the first (Blues/Pop) era of the Stones' carreer may bear similarites, there is also a big difference between them, that also divides the B&B and Some Girls albums: In the Sixties (and well into the early seventies part of their second career phase) the Stones were still "relevant" as part of the music scene and as a part of "Youth culture" or as a cultural phenomen. By the mid seventies on the other hand, they had lost that touch and were slowly entering a life as Rock'N'Roll legends , going by their own measures and standards. As Charles Shaar Murray (?) fittingly pointed out at the time, B&B was the first album that was "completely meaningless". I think that's a bit harsh, but it's true in the sense that, beginning with IORR the music slowly started to lead it's own life, apart from it's makers, just as 71 Tele pointed out. With Black & Blue the grandeur and maturity was still there (and that's what we like about it, don't we?), but the relevance had already begun to fade. And that continued and progressed when they entered the third (fun) Phase. There were still impressive songs and stylistic turns (Beast of Burdon, Shattered, Undercover etc.), but somehow these didn't "matter" as much and didn't pack the same punch as before. Somehow they didn't manage to mature in a way where you're still able to write songs that "connect" (to their own lives and people' lives) in the way people like Dylan or Neil Young did. And that's what - at least in my case - somehow spoils the soup with the third phase - up to this day.

Very good post, and it touches one very difficult theme, that of relevance.

We sometimes tend to say that SOME GIRLS was the last time when The Stones were somehow relevant despite being rock and roll legends. At least by TATTOO YOU and 1981/82 they were beyond the time and place, living as elder statemen of rock, having a kind of untouchable status. It is true that they until SOME GIRLS (and slightly beyond that) tried somehow cope with the latest trends - as pointed here, B&B was heavily influenced by latest trends in black music - but it only have effect on their own sound, not anymore having any influence to the scene around them. They were not introducing any longer new sounds to new audiences (expect the army of Stones fans who were not so pleased or convinced any more). It was "aha, The Stones trying reggae, etc.". Murray had a point but I guess we could trace "no significance" argument at least to IT'S ONLY ROCK'N'ROLL, perhaps even to GOATS HEAD SOAP (as I recall right, those were their best sellers by then). It is funny that all of these mid-seventies albums did sell incredibly well, much much more than few years earlier a truely "relevant" album like BEGGARS BANQUET. So the Stones were having a new huge album buying audience that seemed to buy anything quite easily, without the product being any relevant, trendy or anything. SOME GIRLS, EMOTIONAL RESCUE and TATTOO YOU phase actually did better than anything ever (or since). By album sales that was the peak of the Stons career.

Yeah, the "punk flavor" in SOME GIRLS was just the Stones being influenced by the times with more better focus and inspiration; but they didn't have any say to the climate of the times any longer. It was probably the last time they could cope with the times and trends with somehow convincing, great results. But they were living in musical world of their own by then. And it looks like irony -and sometimes self-irony - was the only way to adapt teh latest trends: think of teh "punk" rockers of SOME GIRLS or the disco sounds of "Emotional Rescue", etc. When they actually tried "seriously" (UNDERCOVER), the big audience wasn't so charmed anymore.

- Doxa

Quote
kleermaker

Doxa, did you read (the last posts of) this thread?

[www.iorr.org]

Quote
Doxa

Quote
kleermaker

Doxa, did you read (the last posts of) this thread?

[www.iorr.org]

Those songs do not click with any longer with the youth culture but are taking more like an "entertainment" route where the only reference is just the music in its own terms, heading for Elvis department or so. And to great sales.

I continue in the other thread...

- Doxa