Tell Me :
Talk
Of course, I own all the titles on different official releases and on the so called Russian boots. But I would be pleased to get the original British albums on an official remastered CD.
Of course it matters. The UK Decca LP's are the originals. The only reason the US releases are currently available on CD is because an American company (Abcko) own the rights.
The Stones entered the studio to record The Rolling Stones and No2, not The Rolling Stones Now! or Decembers Children.
No, they did not. They never entered the studio to record tracks for a specific LP until Aftermath. At the time it just mattered to get some records out as quickly at possible. Note that No. 2 is just as much a compilation of different sessions as 12X5 or Now! is. Out Of Our Heads was even released in the US almost 4 months before the UK version. While the US version contain all freshy new recordings, the UK version features two tracks (Heart Of Stone, Oh Baby) released almost a year before in the US. There is no difference.
You aren't right:
"In January 1964 in between the Ronette's tour the Stones started work on their first album simply titled THE ROLLING STONES, which featured on the cover a simple but effective David Bailey photograph of the five staring from a darkened background, plus the Decca logo."
Source: Martin Elliot: The Rolling Stones - Complete Recording Sessions 1962-2002, London 2002, p. 19
That's right. I forgot the first one. The US edition is a "re-configuraion". But we only talk one track replacement (Not Fade Away for Mona (I Need You Baby)), and some letters on a cover. Don't how serious that 'damage' should be taken...
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-08-01 18:35 by Blueranger.
That's the general misunderstanding. The early albums (at least 12X5, Now!, OOOH & December's Children) isn't bastardized. They are just as original as the UK albums. And: They are compiled by Andrew Oldham.
Er, Not. Hendrix where an American, and his UK releases is the "definitive" ones. No difference.
The "Definitive" ones are the ones available today. Get used to it...
But the Hendrix Experience were a British band. Hendrix may have been an American, but the group formed and based in London.
Buy this man a pint
agree ! i was dispointed when i read that .(1 & 2n:d )uk albums never released
dsd /sacd in 2002...
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
"Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
wordnat
()
Date: August 1, 2010 06:08
Does anyone know where I can purchase RSN2 on CD? thx
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
keefriffhard4life
()
Date: August 1, 2010 06:36
was it ever released on cd by the stones? you can get the russian version with bonus tracks
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
Eirik
()
Date: August 1, 2010 09:51
The only official release is a Japanese London label version from 1987. It has been out of print for over twenty years, and is as you can imagine hard to find. Try ebay, but it will cost you...
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
vancouver
()
Date: August 1, 2010 10:01
i did my own homeburn cd with bonus trax,,,,,,,
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
RobertJohnson
()
Date: August 1, 2010 11:30
I think Decca decided to release the American leg of the first albums on CD. I'm searching for a CD-version of the first British album without any title which was released in the USA titled "Englands Newest Hitmakers" with a different track listing.
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
Blueranger
()
Date: August 1, 2010 14:01
It really doesn't matter.
The early albums where a hotch-podge of different sessions anyway.
All the early albums different tracklists where results of of different marketing strategies on each side of the atlantic at the time.
The Stones and Andrew Oldham simply just adjusted their outputs to the markets in the UK and US.
If it's for the sheer nostalgia, No. 2 is justified for re-release. If not, all songs can be found split on 12X5, Now!, Hot Rocks and More Hot Rocks.
The early albums where a hotch-podge of different sessions anyway.
All the early albums different tracklists where results of of different marketing strategies on each side of the atlantic at the time.
The Stones and Andrew Oldham simply just adjusted their outputs to the markets in the UK and US.
If it's for the sheer nostalgia, No. 2 is justified for re-release. If not, all songs can be found split on 12X5, Now!, Hot Rocks and More Hot Rocks.
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
RobertJohnson
()
Date: August 1, 2010 14:24
Quote
Blueranger
It really doesn't matter.
The early albums where a hotch-podge of different sessions anyway.
All the early albums different tracklists where results of of different marketing strategies on each side of the atlantic at the time.
The Stones and Andrew Oldham simply just adjusted their outputs to the markets in the UK and US.
If it's for the sheer nostalgia, No. 2 is justified for re-release. If not, all songs can be found split on 12X5, Now!, Hot Rocks and More Hot Rocks.
Of course, I own all the titles on different official releases and on the so called Russian boots. But I would be pleased to get the original British albums on an official remastered CD.
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
Big Al
()
Date: August 1, 2010 14:46
Quote
Blueranger
It really doesn't matter.
The early albums where a hotch-podge of different sessions anyway.
Of course it matters. The UK Decca LP's are the originals. The only reason the US releases are currently available on CD is because an American company (Abcko) own the rights.
The Stones entered the studio to record The Rolling Stones and No2, not The Rolling Stones Now! or Decembers Children.
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
Blueranger
()
Date: August 1, 2010 17:06
Quote
Big AlQuote
Blueranger
It really doesn't matter.
The early albums where a hotch-podge of different sessions anyway.
Of course it matters. The UK Decca LP's are the originals. The only reason the US releases are currently available on CD is because an American company (Abcko) own the rights.
The Stones entered the studio to record The Rolling Stones and No2, not The Rolling Stones Now! or Decembers Children.
No, they did not. They never entered the studio to record tracks for a specific LP until Aftermath. At the time it just mattered to get some records out as quickly at possible. Note that No. 2 is just as much a compilation of different sessions as 12X5 or Now! is. Out Of Our Heads was even released in the US almost 4 months before the UK version. While the US version contain all freshy new recordings, the UK version features two tracks (Heart Of Stone, Oh Baby) released almost a year before in the US. There is no difference.
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
Monsoon Ragoon
()
Date: August 1, 2010 17:32
For sale:
CD The Rolling Stones LONDON 820 047-2 (mono; Germany 1984)
CD The Rolling Stones No. 2 LONDON P25L 25033 (mono; Japan 1989 2nd edition; booklet with lyrics)
Great condition.
Serious offers welcome: Kastell.Peripheria@googlemail.com
CD The Rolling Stones LONDON 820 047-2 (mono; Germany 1984)
CD The Rolling Stones No. 2 LONDON P25L 25033 (mono; Japan 1989 2nd edition; booklet with lyrics)
Great condition.
Serious offers welcome: Kastell.Peripheria@googlemail.com
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
RobertJohnson
()
Date: August 1, 2010 18:29
Quote
BluerangerQuote
Big AlQuote
Blueranger
It really doesn't matter.
The early albums where a hotch-podge of different sessions anyway.
Of course it matters. The UK Decca LP's are the originals. The only reason the US releases are currently available on CD is because an American company (Abcko) own the rights.
The Stones entered the studio to record The Rolling Stones and No2, not The Rolling Stones Now! or Decembers Children.
No, they did not. They never entered the studio to record tracks for a specific LP until Aftermath. At the time it just mattered to get some records out as quickly at possible. Note that No. 2 is just as much a compilation of different sessions as 12X5 or Now! is. Out Of Our Heads was even released in the US almost 4 months before the UK version. While the US version contain all freshy new recordings, the UK version features two tracks (Heart Of Stone, Oh Baby) released almost a year before in the US. There is no difference.
You aren't right:
"In January 1964 in between the Ronette's tour the Stones started work on their first album simply titled THE ROLLING STONES, which featured on the cover a simple but effective David Bailey photograph of the five staring from a darkened background, plus the Decca logo."
Source: Martin Elliot: The Rolling Stones - Complete Recording Sessions 1962-2002, London 2002, p. 19
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
Blueranger
()
Date: August 1, 2010 18:32
Quote
RobertJohnsonQuote
BluerangerQuote
Big AlQuote
Blueranger
It really doesn't matter.
The early albums where a hotch-podge of different sessions anyway.
Of course it matters. The UK Decca LP's are the originals. The only reason the US releases are currently available on CD is because an American company (Abcko) own the rights.
The Stones entered the studio to record The Rolling Stones and No2, not The Rolling Stones Now! or Decembers Children.
No, they did not. They never entered the studio to record tracks for a specific LP until Aftermath. At the time it just mattered to get some records out as quickly at possible. Note that No. 2 is just as much a compilation of different sessions as 12X5 or Now! is. Out Of Our Heads was even released in the US almost 4 months before the UK version. While the US version contain all freshy new recordings, the UK version features two tracks (Heart Of Stone, Oh Baby) released almost a year before in the US. There is no difference.
You aren't right:
"In January 1964 in between the Ronette's tour the Stones started work on their first album simply titled THE ROLLING STONES, which featured on the cover a simple but effective David Bailey photograph of the five staring from a darkened background, plus the Decca logo."
Source: Martin Elliot: The Rolling Stones - Complete Recording Sessions 1962-2002, London 2002, p. 19
That's right. I forgot the first one. The US edition is a "re-configuraion". But we only talk one track replacement (Not Fade Away for Mona (I Need You Baby)), and some letters on a cover. Don't how serious that 'damage' should be taken...
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-08-01 18:35 by Blueranger.
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
Per-Arne
()
Date: August 2, 2010 02:46
Japanse London versions:
No 2.
1. 01.05.1987 Original release P33L 25015
2. 25.04.1989 Re-release nr. 1 P33L 25033
3. ??.??.1995 Re-release nr. 2 POCD 1913
Per-Arne
No 2.
1. 01.05.1987 Original release P33L 25015
2. 25.04.1989 Re-release nr. 1 P33L 25033
3. ??.??.1995 Re-release nr. 2 POCD 1913
Per-Arne
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
Lynd8
()
Date: August 2, 2010 04:30
That was one think I liked about when the Beatles Cd's first came out - nice focus on original Lp's and ignored the bastardized Lp's. You ended up with a nice set when you purchased Past Masters 1 & 2. The Stones catalog is a bit of mess (but better music LOL).
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2010-08-02 04:31 by Lynd8.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2010-08-02 04:31 by Lynd8.
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
Blueranger
()
Date: August 2, 2010 11:09
Quote
Lynd8
That was one think I liked about when the Beatles Cd's first came out - nice focus on original Lp's and ignored the bastardized Lp's. You ended up with a nice set when you purchased Past Masters 1 & 2. The Stones catalog is a bit of mess (but better music LOL).
That's the general misunderstanding. The early albums (at least 12X5, Now!, OOOH & December's Children) isn't bastardized. They are just as original as the UK albums. And: They are compiled by Andrew Oldham.
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
Big Al
()
Date: August 2, 2010 13:24
The Stones are a London band and thus, the British releases are the definitive. End of!
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
Blueranger
()
Date: August 2, 2010 13:49
Quote
Big Al
The Stones are a London band and thus, the British releases are the definitive. End of!
Er, Not. Hendrix where an American, and his UK releases is the "definitive" ones. No difference.
The "Definitive" ones are the ones available today. Get used to it...
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
Big Al
()
Date: August 2, 2010 14:01
Quote
BluerangerQuote
Big Al
The Stones are a London band and thus, the British releases are the definitive. End of!
Er, Not. Hendrix where an American, and his UK releases is the "definitive" ones. No difference.
The "Definitive" ones are the ones available today. Get used to it...
But the Hendrix Experience were a British band. Hendrix may have been an American, but the group formed and based in London.
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
vudicus
()
Date: August 2, 2010 15:26
I personally dislike the Japanese cd of No2.
Some of the songs have annoying fade-ins that ruin the intros and there are a few tracks which are in Stereo which although are nice to hear, it should be totally mono like the LP.
Some of the songs have annoying fade-ins that ruin the intros and there are a few tracks which are in Stereo which although are nice to hear, it should be totally mono like the LP.
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
VoodooLounge13
()
Date: August 2, 2010 15:35
I got this one on eBay and it wasn't too pricey. The one I'm having trouble finding is the British version of Thru the Past...
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
The GR
()
Date: August 3, 2010 12:52
Hendrix's Are You Experienced was released in the US without Red House.
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
teleblaster
()
Date: August 3, 2010 15:02
Quote
BluerangerQuote
Big Al
The "Definitive" ones are the ones available today. Get used to it...
No, I don't think so.
For me, the definitive versions are those that I bought all those years ago and played to death. For me, then, that will always be the original UK versions (although, of course, I have the US versions too). Still got my vinyl No2. Have a mono bootleg CD version of it which sounds fine to me.
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
mikey
()
Date: August 3, 2010 15:22
In the interest of setting the matter right David Bailey did not take the cover and liner photographs for the first Rolling Stones LP.
It was Nicky Wright.
For the full story check out:
[cloud-109.blogspot.com]
It was Nicky Wright.
For the full story check out:
[cloud-109.blogspot.com]
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
Blueranger
()
Date: August 3, 2010 17:06
Ok Ok.
But we have to look at what is impotant here.
To some people the German "Around And Around" is also a definitive album.
Since so many editions cropped up in the early 60's, there wasn't room for all of them to be re-released. Which probably is why the UK debut & "No.2" got the axe.
ABKCO chose to focus on the US editions (so did London Records in the 80's), and
supply them with compilations and three UK versions. I agree it's a bit odd, but they obviously wanted it that way.
So if we look upon those re-releases:
The Rolling Stones (Englands's Newest Hitmakers):
The only difference is one song replacement and letters on the cover. If people have serious issues with that, they need more important things in their lives!
12X5:
Released as their second album in US and including songs Released and NOT released in Britian.
Now!
Substitiute for NO. 2 in the US. Better songs and better flow. Again includes songs only later released in the UK.
Out Of Our Heads US:
A set of brand new recordings and released 3 months BEFORE the UK version.
Out Of Our Heads UK:
This set pales in comparison with Now! and US OOOH. It's even MORE a compilation of different sessions than those two albums.
December's Children:
Ok, this one is a rush-job. Too much pressure... A money-milker.
Big Hits US:
Maybe the UK album flows better, but this one is a statement of the early era. Looking at it that way, it's way superior.
Aftermath UK:
The first one thought as an album. Even though it's a bit too long. This is the definitive edition.
Aftermath US:
Not nessecary. Unless your an American... Could have spared us...
Got Live If You Want It!
Well....
Between The Buttons UK:
The original...
Between The Buttons US:
See Aftermath US... They could have spared us for this one.
Flowers:
A good compilation. Kind of a "lost" album.
Their Satanic Majesties Request / Beggars Banquet / Let It Bleed / Get Yer 'Ya-Ya's Out!:
We know them.
Through The Past Darkly:
Maybe some prefer the UK version, but it's odd to include You Better Move On and Sittin' On A Fence. Hits???
The US edition is just as the title promises.
Hot Rocks / More Hot Rocks:
Nice compilations. MHR has a nice 'Rarities' section.
Metamorphosis:
Hmm...
Singles Collection:
Totally fantastic and a good idea.
Rock And Roll Circus:
Better to see than to hear.
Boxes: Singles 1963-65 / 1965-1967 / 1968-1971:
The first box includes the 3 UK EP's. A nice addition.
Rolled Gold +:
Another comp. But this one includes ALL important tracks. A good introduction to the new fan.
Get Yer Ya-Ya's Out! Deluxe:
F.A.N.T.A.S.T.I.C.!!!
Maybe some people need to justify themselves and want the first two UK's also. But they are not important as there are no 'unique' tracks on them. They are just two pieces of nostalgia.
But we have to look at what is impotant here.
To some people the German "Around And Around" is also a definitive album.
Since so many editions cropped up in the early 60's, there wasn't room for all of them to be re-released. Which probably is why the UK debut & "No.2" got the axe.
ABKCO chose to focus on the US editions (so did London Records in the 80's), and
supply them with compilations and three UK versions. I agree it's a bit odd, but they obviously wanted it that way.
So if we look upon those re-releases:
The Rolling Stones (Englands's Newest Hitmakers):
The only difference is one song replacement and letters on the cover. If people have serious issues with that, they need more important things in their lives!
12X5:
Released as their second album in US and including songs Released and NOT released in Britian.
Now!
Substitiute for NO. 2 in the US. Better songs and better flow. Again includes songs only later released in the UK.
Out Of Our Heads US:
A set of brand new recordings and released 3 months BEFORE the UK version.
Out Of Our Heads UK:
This set pales in comparison with Now! and US OOOH. It's even MORE a compilation of different sessions than those two albums.
December's Children:
Ok, this one is a rush-job. Too much pressure... A money-milker.
Big Hits US:
Maybe the UK album flows better, but this one is a statement of the early era. Looking at it that way, it's way superior.
Aftermath UK:
The first one thought as an album. Even though it's a bit too long. This is the definitive edition.
Aftermath US:
Not nessecary. Unless your an American... Could have spared us...
Got Live If You Want It!
Well....
Between The Buttons UK:
The original...
Between The Buttons US:
See Aftermath US... They could have spared us for this one.
Flowers:
A good compilation. Kind of a "lost" album.
Their Satanic Majesties Request / Beggars Banquet / Let It Bleed / Get Yer 'Ya-Ya's Out!:
We know them.
Through The Past Darkly:
Maybe some prefer the UK version, but it's odd to include You Better Move On and Sittin' On A Fence. Hits???
The US edition is just as the title promises.
Hot Rocks / More Hot Rocks:
Nice compilations. MHR has a nice 'Rarities' section.
Metamorphosis:
Hmm...
Singles Collection:
Totally fantastic and a good idea.
Rock And Roll Circus:
Better to see than to hear.
Boxes: Singles 1963-65 / 1965-1967 / 1968-1971:
The first box includes the 3 UK EP's. A nice addition.
Rolled Gold +:
Another comp. But this one includes ALL important tracks. A good introduction to the new fan.
Get Yer Ya-Ya's Out! Deluxe:
F.A.N.T.A.S.T.I.C.!!!
Maybe some people need to justify themselves and want the first two UK's also. But they are not important as there are no 'unique' tracks on them. They are just two pieces of nostalgia.
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
FreeBird
()
Date: August 3, 2010 22:38
Still, the UK version is a better album. But more important than the difference between Mona and Not Fade Away is the fact that their UK debut is the ONLY place where you can find the four-minute version of Tell Me. This alone is enough to make it the definitive one.Quote
Blueranger
The Rolling Stones (Englands's Newest Hitmakers):
The only difference is one song replacement and letters on the cover. If people have serious issues with that, they need more important things in their lives!
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
Jan Richards
()
Date: August 5, 2010 00:36
I never understood why ABKCO released UK versions of OOOH, Aftermath, Buttons and so on, but left out the first one and No2. From an European point of view the current set of Stones 60’s CD’s is a total mess.
The very first Rolling Stones LP opens with Route 66 and that LP is not available on CD. That is bad.
It is not a matter of whitch songs are available on what CD, the thing is the Stones is an UK band and we need to have the original UK vinyl catalogue available on CD as well.
Jan Richards
[www.stonesondecca.com]
The very first Rolling Stones LP opens with Route 66 and that LP is not available on CD. That is bad.
It is not a matter of whitch songs are available on what CD, the thing is the Stones is an UK band and we need to have the original UK vinyl catalogue available on CD as well.
Jan Richards
[www.stonesondecca.com]
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
Big Al
()
Date: August 5, 2010 09:14
Quote
Jan Richards
It is not a matter of whitch songs are available on what CD, the thing is the Stones is an UK band and we need to have the original UK vinyl catalogue available on CD as well.
Buy this man a pint
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
vancouver
()
Date: August 5, 2010 10:06
Quote
Jan Richards
I never understood why ABKCO released UK versions of OOOH, Aftermath, Buttons and so on, but left out the first one and No2. From an European point of view the current set of Stones 60’s CD’s is a total mess.
The very first Rolling Stones LP opens with Route 66 and that LP is not available on CD. That is bad.
It is not a matter of whitch songs are available on what CD, the thing is the Stones is an UK band and we need to have the original UK vinyl catalogue available on CD as well.
agree ! i was dispointed when i read that .(1 & 2n:d )uk albums never released
dsd /sacd in 2002...
Re: "Rolling Stones No.2" on CD?
Posted by:
Come On
()
Date: August 5, 2010 11:52
Give Rolling Stones No.2 and Bob Dylans 1973 'Dylan' back to the people!!
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
BlueLands , fdajef , jmd , joguema , Racca1962 , rastakeith , stargroover , Testify , walkingthedog , werther2003 , z
Guests:
1391
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10