I hate this lists but I will try.


Tattoo You
Some Girls
Exile On Main St
Let It Bleed
Sticky Fingers
Out Of Our Heads
Beggars Banquet
Black N Blue
Goats Head Soup
It's Only Rock N Roll
Rolling Stones #2
Rolling Stones
Between The Buttons
Aftermath
Black N Blue
Voodoo Lounge
Steel Wheels
A Bigger Bang
Bridges To Babylon
Satanic Majesties
Undercover
Emotinal Rescue
Dirty Work

Exile On Main St
Sticky Fingers/Let It Bleed/Beggar's Banquet (ordered differently any given day)
Some Girls
Tattoo You
Aftermath (UK)
12x5
Out Of Our Heads (US)
England's Newest Hitmakers
Goats Head Soup
Black N Blue
It's Only Rock N Roll
A Bigger Bang
Between The Buttons (UK)
Voodoo Lounge
Bridges To Babylon
Steel Wheels
Undercover
Emotinal Rescue
Satanic Majesties
Dirty Work


After 4 pages, of this, which one is "Definitive"?

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Which tracks would that be?

I think Keith's slide on LIV is one of the most soulful takes on the blues ever. Same with Monkey Man. Midnight Ramble could have used a little spark, though.

GS should not have been touched.

Dandelion, i think with Brian being unable to contribute so consistently, 'Beggars Banquet' and 'Let It Bleed' provided Keith with plenty of opportunities to truly shine, although i'm not so sure he really enjoyed having to take such a big portion of the guitar playing responsiblilities, without having another guitarist to play off. If anyone truly impresses on 'Let It Bleed' it is Keith in my opinion. From the haunting opening guitar lines to 'Gimme Shelter' onwards, Keith never fails to impress. I think 'Love In Vain' is fabulous, and very soulful as you rightly say, in the style of Keith's playing, and it does work incredibly well even without the brilliance that Mick Taylor brought to the song in live performance. However, there are times when i think Jagger's vocal could have displayed a little more sensitivity (as with Charlie's drums), as he did on 'No Expectations' from 'Beggars Banquet'. Sometimes it can be the smallest of details like this which leads me to to believe 'Beggars Banquet' to be ultimately the better album of the two. I also think 'Monkey Man' to be a bit of a filler track, as far as song quality is concerned, although like pretty much all of the songs from this period, 'Monkey Man' also contains more than a few pleasing elements as well. I always love Jagger's harmonica playing on 'Midnight Rambler', which is definitely one of the most impressive examples of his playing.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2010-09-20 22:15 by Edward Twining.

Yeah, I agree, Edward. Well put. This is definitely Keith´s album.

I think 'No Expectations' is such a beautiful track, Dandelion, in pretty much every respect. It flows so naturally, without anything to stand in its way, and of course with Brian's wonderfully expressive slide quitar playing being the definite highlight, alongside Jagger's very sensitively delivered vocal. I may very well be wrong, but 'No Expectations' almost sounds like it was based on Robert Johnson's 'Love In Vain' before the Stones decided to record an adaptation of the Robert Johnson recording, for 'Let It Bleed'.

Definitely some of the same feel to it. Yeah, Brian´s slide comes across as pure instinct and feel. Great stuff. Even "shaky" at the right places.

TOP 15

1. Undercover
2. Aftermath
3. Voodoo lounge
4. Exile on main st.
6. black and blue
7. emotional rescue
8. dirty work
9. steel wheels
10. let it bleed
11. some girls
12. bridges to babylon
13. tattoo you
14. their satanic majesties request
15. sticky fingers

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Definitely some of the same feel to it. Yeah, Brian´s slide comes across as pure instinct and feel. Great stuff. Even "shaky" at the right places.

Yes, exactly, Dandelion, and that sound the Stones achieve on 'No Expectations' and very much the whole of 'Beggars Banquet', is very much the antithesis of many of the more modern recordings by more contemporary artists, where the sound and production is often an attempt to be too perfect and too polished for the songs to display genuine emotions sufficiently perhaps, where the glossiness ultimately results in an overall sterile delivery in terms of sound. 'Parachute Woman' is brilliant too. It has an almost hypnotic bluesy groove which really does become highly addictive on repeated listens. It is another example of the Stones at the very height of their game, where they are constantly building on a rhythm in an attempt to seduce the listener, which ultimately contributes to a richly rewarding listening experience. The Stones are playing by ear at this point in time in attaining a genuine feel, most subtely at times too, as much as relying on technical perfections, although i don't think one can criticise their musical abilties in any way on 'Beggars Banquet', every detail contributes marvellously to that greater whole. Yes, the Stones were definitely masters of musical seduction at this point in time.



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 2010-09-21 09:25 by Edward Twining.

Rethinking the Golden Period and Its Ranking...

Why BEGGARS BANQUET is slightly better than LET IT BLEED?

I totally agree with Edward Twining's observations and (wonderful) analysis of both albums, especially re BEGGARS. I just add something more of their outer or formal look.

Like noticed in this thread the band was in constant evolution during the Golden Era: each album was different. But if here was one gap that wasn't so huge that was between BEGGARS and LET IT BLEED. That's why LET IT LEED is not so original or inspirative as BEGGARS was. Even though it includes some the best things they have ever done - notably "Gimme Shelter" - there was a certain repition in the air. As albums they came from the same concept. Both of them start with their Biggest Effort caught in tape so far: if one thought one cannot top "Sympathy For The Devil" with another 'totally different, earth-breaking masterpiece', so wrong s/he was. With "Gimme Shelter" the band continued with the same tactics as in BEGGARS: Just for a starter, let's shock them with the best and most dareful song we can. After the massive attack of the opening songs, both albums continue with less-dramatic, acoustic numbers. Someone mentioned that "No Expectations" is based "Love In Vain" - not sure of that but both of the tracks enjoy similar function in their respective albums. After the sentimental, reflective blues momens both albums turn another gear: let's make fun of redneck country music. "Country Honk" enjoys the function of "Dear Doctor". Okay, that's it. Now time to show our rhythm'n' blues/rock and roll essence. "Live With Me" - having more STICKY FINGERS-like sophistication in sound - is using the same sense of drama as "Parachute Woman" (They could have used "Jiving Sister Fanny" in a place of "Live With Me" as well.) Both albums end their first side with Keith's notable slide-driven, half-anthem-like song ("Jig-Saw Puzzle"/"Let It Bleed").

Okay, flip side. Time to show the nastiest, edgiest side of the Stones. The political anarchy of "Stree Fighting Man" has changed to the open flirting with violence of "Midnight Rambler", musically both based on down-to-earth, back to basics blues sound of the band - that being as important character of the songs as their lyrical content. Thanks "Rambler" being as long as it is (and having its varying feeling moments within its course), the easy-now anti-thesis part of the b-side is shorter in BLEED as in BEGGARS; only one - "You Got The Silver" - is needed against "Prodigal Son" and "Factory Girl". However, the teasing with almost pornographical themes (and the band getting ther ya-ya's out) is repeated agian; the function of "Stray Cat Blues" is followed by "Monkey Man". Both album end with anthem-intended, socially and surrounding-reflective, "big" song (SOTE -> YCAGWYW).

So, my argument is that both albums enjoy the similar "drama" concept as albums. In many cases the songs in BLEED are better than the 'originals' in BEGGARS but still some originality is lost in the process. In BEGGARS anything is so fresh and innovative (and perhaps due that it is more cohesive as an album; being so inspired, driven by the muse, they simply couldn't do wrong). I think the biggest difference is comes from there, and why I rate BEGGARS slightly over LET IT BLEED. However, it needs be noted - to not get wrong impression in my "criticism" - that the quality of song material, and the way to deliver them, is perfect in both albums.

(By the way, the same drama concept of opening and finishing the album with certain kind of songs - but with horrible resuls though - is perhaps already "tested" in SATANIC MAJESTIES.)

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2010-09-22 11:47 by Doxa.

nice analysis, Doxa. Production-wise (as well as with the mix), I have to give a nod to Let It Bleed, though. Yet, I agree with your other points there.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Production-wise (as well as with the mix), I have to give a nod to Let It Bleed, though. Yet, I agree with your other points there.

I am not sure about the production or mix point. Like Edward, I think BEGGARS is perfect as it is; I cannot think any detail to be changed - or how it would sound any better. Yeah, BEGGARS is more chaotic, muddy and raw in some places - think of "Parachute Woman", "Street Fighting Man", "Stray Cat Blues" - but I think that it is part of its 'dangerous', 'threating' charm. And then the sharp and clear, distinctive "Sympathy For The Devil" is possibly teh best mixed piece they ever have done. Pure genious (by Miller or whoever).

I think the difference in approach to production can be heard in comparing "Stray Cat Blues" to "Monkey Man". The raw and chaotic atmopshere in contrast to the more sophisticated, sublime approach. Both work very well. Good to have them both!

- Doxa



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2010-09-22 18:15 by Doxa.

The difference in production between BB and LIB reminds me of the difference between the Beatles' White Album (1968) and Let It Be (1969). The White Album is more earthy sounding, however a new Neve mixing console was installed and used for Let It Be, giving a lighter more delicate sound. Ringo complained that his drums didn't sound as "heavy" any more, as they did using the previous valve mixing desk at EMI studios. I'm speculating now, but perhaps Olympic Sound had a similar upgrade in 1969 which may have affected the sound and explains why LIB sounds more polished than BB.

Quote
Doxa
And then the sharp and clear, distinctive "Sympathy For The Devil" is possibly teh best mixed piece they ever have done. Pure genious (by Miller or whoever).

- Doxa

To be honest, as much as I love BB, I don't like SFTD studio version that much. The first rehearsed version (Godard movie) with the slow tempo and organ and then the 'break', worked much better for me. Now it's too much piano and I also don't like the guitar solo in it. So I prefer many live versions during the 69 and 70 tours.

1.BEGGARS BANQUET
2.BLACK AND BLUE
3.BETWEEN THE BUTTONS
4. all others

And when the Lord gets ready you gotta move

Quote
gerhard
1.BEGGARS BANQUET
2.BLACK AND BLUE
3.BETWEEN THE BUTTONS
4. all others

not:

1.BEGGARS BANQUET
2.BLACK AND BLUE
3.BETWEEN THE BUTTONS
4.BRIDGES TO BABYLON
?

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
Doxa
And then the sharp and clear, distinctive "Sympathy For The Devil" is possibly teh best mixed piece they ever have done. Pure genious (by Miller or whoever).

- Doxa

To be honest, as much as I love BB, I don't like SFTD studio version that much. The first rehearsed version (Godard movie) with the slow tempo and organ and then the 'break', worked much better for me. Now it's too much piano and I also don't like the guitar solo in it. So I prefer many live versions during the 69 and 70 tours.

For me the original studio version is the definitive version of it. Jagger's voice has ever had as much vitality as it does there - I have never heard him really being able to sing it properly live (the same is with "Paint It Black", by the way.). There is not any other song Mick is able to create as much 'drama' with solely effectiviness of his own voice as he does there; every little nuance in words and its melody comes perfect. And he is given much role; a genious decision by Miller. I would say not less than it is Mick's greatest achievemnt in record ever. Every live version is a disappointment to me as far as Mick's contribution is concerned. For example, the YA-YA's version is relatively lame.

Then the adventurous idea to use the samba rhythm, the dramatic effect of the piano to back up Mick's voice, the bass... ,of course, the 'no hostages' killer sound of the blues solo.. I still remember the very first time I listened the song (I just knew the title before that) and I was totally blown by it: can rock and roll played THIS way. (The same was with "Gimme Shelter", by the way). Man, those are some cool cats.

I can understand the attraction of live versions, the stunning guitars and all, but to me they are just typical, ordinary rock and roll arrangements (of course, great in that category) and not able to create the tension and drama of the studio version. Of course, I am talking about the guitar-driven versions from 1969 to 1975 (or so), not the horrible, lame Las Vegas attempts to copy the original version from 1989 on. (If there is one song I would NEVER like The Stones to perform again, that's "Sympathy". It is the most suffered victim of the Vegas Era.)

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-09-22 18:44 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa
But if here was one gap that wasn't so huge that was between BEGGARS and LET IT BLEED.
- Doxa

Huge gap for me!

Beggars is still strongly rooted in the late Brian Jones era (in a certain way I always see it as an evolution of the Aftermath concept).

Bleed is the first album of a new era, dominated by Keith's "new" confident use of the electric guitar. Songs like Shelter, Live with Me, Monkey Man, Rambler are "made" by Keith's guitar parts. Not only the catchy riffs, but the tone, the use of the amps, the arrangements. The band is dealing with a totally new sound.

Of course I am speaking of the overall result, because certain songs could have been on any of the two.

C

Quote
liddas

Quote
Doxa
But if here was one gap that wasn't so huge that was between BEGGARS and LET IT BLEED.
- Doxa

Huge gap for me!

Beggars is still strongly rooted in the late Brian Jones era (in a certain way I always see it as an evolution of the Aftermath concept).

Bleed is the first album of a new era, dominated by Keith's "new" confident use of the electric guitar. Songs like Shelter, Live with Me, Monkey Man, Rambler are "made" by Keith's guitar parts. Not only the catchy riffs, but the tone, the use of the amps, the arrangements. The band is dealing with a totally new sound.

Of course I am speaking of the overall result, because certain songs could have been on any of the two.

C

I agree and they didn't escape the influence from Dylan as succesfully as on Sympathy (as shown in Goddard's film) on all numbers on Beggars. On Let it Bleed they are unbeatable - and succeeds in beating the challenge from the Doors (The end an When the musics over) in Midnight rambler. Let it Bleed is a dark, serious, playful and ironical masterpiece.

So difficult ranking them.

I tend to agree with Let it Bleed at number 1...and Dirty Work number last.

I'll be cruxified I know, and perhaps even banned for even considering this, and it's a shame that it's UK only, as that really lowers Aftermath's ranking IMO, but here goes:

VOODOO LOUNGE -94
A BIGGER BANG -05
EXILE ON MAIN STREET -72
STICKY FINGERS -71
LET IT BLEED -69
TATTOO YOU -81
BLACK AND BLUE -76
SOME GIRLS -78
GOATS HEAD SOAP -63
BEGGARS BANQUET -68
STEEL WHEELS -89
BETWEEN THE BUTTONS -67
DIRTY WORK - 86
OUT OF OUR HEADS -65
IT’S ONLY ROCK’N’ROLL -74
BRIDGES TO BABYLON -97
AFTERMATH -66
UNDERCOVER -83
EMOTIONAL RESCUE -80
THE ROLLING STONES -64
THE ROLLING STONES NO 2 -65
THEIR SATANIC MAJESTIES REQUEST - 67


1-3 never change. The others are open to change....

I think Olympic received 8 track machines in spring 1969, might have atleast something to do with the production differences between BB and LIB. TOMK seems rather clued up about the gear at Olympic, hope he can chime in with a more exact date.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-09-23 08:49 by His Majesty.

Quote
liddas

Quote
Doxa
But if here was one gap that wasn't so huge that was between BEGGARS and LET IT BLEED.
- Doxa

Huge gap for me!

Beggars is still strongly rooted in the late Brian Jones era (in a certain way I always see it as an evolution of the Aftermath concept).

Bleed is the first album of a new era, dominated by Keith's "new" confident use of the electric guitar. Songs like Shelter, Live with Me, Monkey Man, Rambler are "made" by Keith's guitar parts. Not only the catchy riffs, but the tone, the use of the amps, the arrangements. The band is dealing with a totally new sound.

Of course I am speaking of the overall result, because certain songs could have been on any of the two.

C

I think Doxa is right. There is not a huge gap between 'Beggars Banquet' and 'Let It Bleed' stylistically, certainly nowhere near as much as with 'Let It Bleed' and 'Sticky Fingers', which incorporated much more of a sophisticated, hard rock sound, very brassy in places too, which ultimately led to the sound on 'Exile On Main Street'. I always think of 'Beggars Banquet' and 'Let It Bleed' as like a set of twins, stylistically, and also in terms of the ways the albums are sequenced. In a sense though on closer examination,'Let It Bleed' definitely shows more of a sophisticated rock sound creeping in, amongst the acoustic blend of sounds. Pretty much Keith is playing acoustic and slide much in the same way as on 'Beggars Banquet' on many of the tracks, although some of the rawness and bare acoustic sounds are being augmented with more electric instrumentation. Jagger is also beginning to flex his more mannered rock vocals more noticeably in places. Just as 'Live With Me' on Let It Bleed' serves to foresee where the Stones were to be going with 'Sticky Fingers', inversely 'Jigsaw Puzzle' on 'Beggars Banquet' indicates elements left over from the Stones 67 era recordings slightly, with the Dylan influenced lyrics, Jagger's slightly 67 style vocal and the rhythmic piano ponding style supplied by Nicky Hopkins, which also incorporates more typically Keith's 68 style slide playing. I think 'Jigsaw Puzzle' sounds a little reminiscent of, say, 'Who's Been Sleeping Here' in terms of instrumentation and the Dylan influenced lyrical content, although it fits into the more bluesy theme of 'Beggars Banquet' incredibly well.

LIB is like a refined BB, a continuation of the sound/feel they'd discovered circa Spring - Summer 1968 with an attempt to better it perhaps, but not quite succeeding as a whole.

The hints of psych from BB are all, but wiped away on LIB. One of the reasons I prefer Beggars... I likes traces of LSD in music.

lib of course has an ace card in the form of Gimme Shelter, probably the most successful realization of the then new sound on tape. Plain and simple, it's an amazing piece of music! It hasn't really been bettered by the band on any of the songs on the same album or on any of albums that followed. Tip of the hat to all who were involved in it's making.!

Therein lies my strange relationship with Let It Bleed... I think it's a patchy album, inferior to Beggars Banquet in so many ways, but yet it contains one of their best, if not the best tracks the band ever did... and it's without Brian, my favourite Rolling Stone.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2010-09-23 12:05 by His Majesty.

Gimme Shelter is a great tune, I wish they even once tried to get the same rhythm and feel when playing live - every live version tends to be sloppy, even back in 1969. I guess it's an easy tune to be sloppy with as it's so simple an arrangement (sometimes the more complex tunes come out better when playing live).

Although I like Midnight Rambler a lot I've never been happy with this recording on LIB, it sounds like it's been bounced one too many times. But if it was recorded on 8-track then I don't understand why bouncing would be necessary (except when creating the stereo master).

Overall I prefer the sound of BB to LIB, LIB sounds a bit dry and clean in places, eg. Love In Vain.

Quote
His Majesty
LIB is like a refined BB, a continuation of the sound/feel they'd discovered circa Spring - Summer 1968 with an attempt to better it perhaps, but not quite succeeding as a whole.

The hints of psych from BB are all, but wiped away on LIB. One of the reasons I prefer Beggars... I likes traces of LSD in music.

lib of course has an ace card in the form of Gimme Shelter, probably the most successful realization of the then new sound on tape. Plain and simple, it's an amazing piece of music! It hasn't really been bettered by the band on any of the songs on the same album or on any of albums that followed. Tip of the hat to all who were involved in it's making.!

Therein lies my strange relationship with Let It Bleed... I think it's a patchy album, inferior to Beggars Banquet in so many ways, but yet it contains one of their best, if not the best tracks the band ever did... and it's without Brian, my favourite Rolling Stone.

I mostly agree with you: I like BB better than Bleed, AND have mixed emotions re Bleed, AND am a HUGE fan of Brian ... yet I still see Bleed (or, better, Honky Tonk Women) as THE start of a new era. Fingers and Exile are much closer to Bleed than Banquet.

Keith had been the only man in charge of the guitar section already for some time before Bleed. But Bleed is the first LP firmly based on Keith's work. And for the first time his guitar work truly jumps out as personal and original even for the casual fan. We all know that Keith was important from day one, but I think that people started noticing it only with Bleed.

One can argue that also on Beggars Keith was doing all the guitars. True. Banquet is bare bones, but you know, you feel there is so much more than Keith's guitars in it, and in your great thread on who does what on that album, one understands why so.

Last but not least, at the time electric guitar was truly becoming the instrument of rock and roll. Guitar heroes were starting to take away part of the spotlights from singers. It is as if the circumstances were calling for Keith to prove what HE could do with electricity. Make the guitar play louder was not enough anymore.

Shelter was his answer to this. And, as you said, it was one hell of an answer!

C

Quote
His Majesty
LIB is like a refined BB, a continuation of the sound/feel they'd discovered circa Spring - Summer 1968 with an attempt to better it perhaps, but not quite succeeding as a whole.

The hints of psych from BB are all, but wiped away on LIB. One of the reasons I prefer Beggars... I likes traces of LSD in music.

lib of course has an ace card in the form of Gimme Shelter, probably the most successful realization of the then new sound on tape. Plain and simple, it's an amazing piece of music! It hasn't really been bettered by the band on any of the songs on the same album or on any of albums that followed. Tip of the hat to all who were involved in it's making.!

Therein lies my strange relationship with Let It Bleed... I think it's a patchy album, inferior to Beggars Banquet in so many ways, but yet it contains one of their best, if not the best tracks the band ever did... and it's without Brian, my favourite Rolling Stone.

I believe you are right, His Majesty. 'Gimme Shelter' is very much an era defining song, and in many ways demonstrates how far Keith had come in the beauty (and subtelty) of his playing, with the wonderfully effective opening guitar lines. Of course, this was uniquely different to anything Keith had attempted before in terms of its sheer majesty, as well as the majestic beauty of the song as a whole as it progressed, which the Stones would never come close to repeating so profoundly again, so there was undeniably a major development to be found on 'Let It Bleed' as an album. Of course, the increased sophistication of the album as a whole, and the slightly more heavily electrified feel also mark a definite progression from 'Beggars Banquet', although perhaps ultimately proving relatively small, compared with the era defining opening track.

I agree, His Majesty, as a whole 'Let It Bleed' just doesn't sit so comfortably as 'Beggars Banquet', and the songs tend to compliment other to a much lesser degree, too. The pieces just don't fit together so effectively. 'Beggars Banquet' is such a remarkably relaxed and measured piece of work by comparison. 'Let It Bleed' is ultimately a little more patchy song quality wise too, although if one was to judge most albums alongside 'Beggars Banquet' the result would be more than likely the same. 'Beggars Banquet' proves an exception, and very much not the rule where album quality is concerned. Judged on its own merits, however, 'Let It Bleed' still comes across as remarkably strong.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2010-09-23 19:36 by Edward Twining.

yeah, I'm not sure how fair it is to compare Let It Bleed to Beggars Banquet solely on the terms of Beggars Banquet, which as an organic listening experience probably can't be topped by any group. And on LIB, brian is missed (and discussions here have helped me realize how important he still was on B. The way the albums virtually parallel each other track for track is something that occurred to me a long time ago. But I don't think that should be held against the latter album, at this point, long after they were released, especially as several tracks to me do represent refinements. "Monkey Man," in particular, goes somewhere different from every other Stones cut, yet is still quintessentially the Stones.

Yes, cc, i think the Stones music definitely had a different feel when Brian was in the group, although by the time of 'Beggars Banquet' his contributions had diminished considerably. How much he genuinely contributed to 'Beggars Banquet' remains questionable, apart from of course his major highlight, the beautiful slide playing on 'No Expectations'. He also contributes to 'Midnight Rambler' and 'You Got The Silver' from 'Let It Bleed', i believe. I think there is still a natural naivety to the Stones sound on much of 'Beggars Banquet' which they begin to lose on 'Let It Bleed' a little, particuarly when Jagger's vocals begin to harden up a little more. Maybe though it is not the loss of Brian that made such a difference ultimately, but the arrival of Mick Taylor, although it would take the until the 69 tour and the release of 'Sticky Fingers in 71, until his true musical significance could really be evaluated. I think the true beauty of an album like the live 'Get Yer Ya Yas Out!' is the fact that although many of the songs were originally recorded in the relatively recent 68/69 period, those live interpretations tend to put sometimes a very different slant on them, which results very much in the listener hearing those songs from a different perspective, which proves really quite fascinating. I think generally the likes of 'Street Fighting Man', 'Stray Cat Blues', and 'Midnight Rambler' are given a more brutal rock treatment, thanks to a large degree to the arrival of Mick Taylor, and 'Sympathy For The Devil' and 'Jumpin Jack Flash' (especially from the Gimme Shelter film) are given a more sexy/funky rock treatment which becomes something the Stones were to become renowned for in the early seventies. However, although in many instances Taylor provides a lot more sting and bite to the arrangements, i believe pretty much their message (certainly in the case of 'Street Fighting Man' and 'Sympathy For The Devil') is often lost, to the dynamics of the musicianship, which leads me to believe the studio versions remain the definitive versions of those songs. However, 'Midnight Rambler' does tend to gain more in lyrical significance in a live environment, where the weight of its lyrics can really be driven home, in a more theatrical sense, too. I still believe Taylor's true significance is best demonstated on the live version of 'Love In Vain' which i feel to be overall superior in many respects to the original 'Let It Bleed' version. However, while i do believe many of those songs are defined most strongly by their studio counterparts, certainly from a live rock 'n' roll style perspective it would also be hard to claim that those live versions are altogether inferior. The emphasis may not be on the message to a large degree, and even less so by the early 70s but they ('Gimme Shelter' especially for example), take on a whole new 'musical' emphasis. They are of course brilliant too, but just in a very different way. There is a strong point to be made that those live arrangements contributed to the Stones delivering what could arguably be conceived the greatest rock 'n' roll shows ever, and especially once they had loosed up a little more for the 72/73 tours. However, what was so magical at that time about the Stones was that in a studio setting, they often worked to very different musical principles.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2010-09-23 23:06 by Edward Twining.

For me the Beggars Banquet songs are weaker live than the studio versions, basic strumming chords on Sympathy for example just don't cut it like Nicky's hot piano.

All things considered the Get Yer Ya Yas Out! Love in Vain and Midnight Rambler are superior to the studio versions mainly because there is better interplay between the musicians and there's lead parts, especially on Love in Vain, that totally reflect the lyrics.

Quote
His Majesty
For me the Beggars Banquet songs are weaker live than the studio versions, basic strumming chords on Sympathy for example just don't cut it like Nicky's hot piano.

All things considered the Get Yer Ya Yas Out! Love in Vain and Midnight Rambler are superior to the studio versions mainly because there is better interplay between the musicians and there's lead parts, especially on Love in Vain, that totally reflect the lyrics.

You make a good point, His Majesty. Those 'Beggars Banquet' tracks work much better as songs on the original album, more than live in concert, where the dynamism of the arrangements often overshadow the core values of the songs, despite being great rock 'n' roll. In that respect, i would always refer to the studio versions, as the best examples of the songs greatness. 'Street Fighting Man' and 'Sympathy For The Devil' very much have threatening overtones in their original incarnation, especially with regard to the brilliance of Jagger's vocal in conveying the message, which is lost to a degree live, within the rock 'n' roll spectacle. However, i wouldn't want to be without those brilliant live recordings, either. Perhaps the 'Let It Bleed' songs are not so clear cut in that regard, where, for me, 'Love In Vain' and 'Live With Me' tend to flow better live, as they perhaps appear a little less clunky. 'Love In Vain' certainly flows much better, in pretty much every respect, including Jagger's more sensitive vocal, and the beautiful Mick Taylor guitar solo very much proves to be the icing on the cake, so to speak. 'Midnight Rambler' tends to come to life a little more explicitely too, within its drama, although i must admit to having great regard for the bluesy sounding 'Let It Bleed' original, even though it is a little less theatrical. Certainly, with the 69 live shows, the Stones music appears to be hardening somewhat, especially within the guitar interplay, and Jagger's tougher vocal approach, which is perhaps more macho. Those shows certainly have much more of a 'rock' feel, much more sophisticated too. This change seems a lot more striking than the differences in sound between the albums 'Beggars Banquet' and 'Let It Bleed', and to a degree forsees the next step the Stones would take with 'Sticky Fingers'. To a point, the 69 shows seem a little stiff and formal in the way the Stones portray their sound, which is perhaps also true of the more professional sounding 'Sticky Fingers'. However, by 'Exile On Main Street' and the 72 tour, the Stones would loosen up somewhat, to record and perform some of their greatest music ever (not that the 69 tour isn't an example of that too!).



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2010-09-24 09:19 by Edward Twining.