Tell Me :  Talk
Talk about your favorite band. 

Previous page Next page First page IORR home

For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.

Goto Page: Previous12
Current Page: 2 of 2
Re: Rolling Stones No 2
Posted by: treaclefingers ()
Date: October 20, 2022 09:09

Quote
Big Al
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
Doxa
Quote
Big Al
Quote
DandelionPowderman
The Rolling Stones beat Some Girls chart-wise?

Not globally, of course. Some Girls is their biggest-seller overall, and it certainly is in the U.S.A. I think, however, that Rolling Stones No.2 could be their biggest-selling in the U.K. it did spend an incredible 10 weeks at #1 in early 1965.

Their debut spend even 12 weeks at #1 in UK . It is also their best selling studio album in their home country (NO 2 being second - they really peaked in popularity there then, so it's downhill ever since.. grinning smiley). SOME GIRLS sold only about half of its sales there, reaching #2 at best. Interestingly, decades later, when the album market was already suffering terribly, BLUE & LONESOME managed to sell almost the same amount of copies as the big album era hit album SOME GIRLS in UK. The British love the Stones playing the blues! Cool!

- Doxa

That is trez interesting. I had no idea albums like LIB, Sticky, Exile, Some Girls, Tattoo You couldn't outsell their debut album in the UK.

It is interesting, considering that the single and EP formats were the most popular amongst the Stones’ European demographic in the 60’s. LP’s were very expensive. I’ve read elsewhere, they in terms of sheer fandom, 1965 was their peak in the U.K. yes, for five-minutes, they really were bigger than the Beatles! Regarding Some Girls: I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: it was a U.S. phenomenon. I was surprised by its unwavering popularity amongst so many of the American posters on these message boards, as I genuinely didn’t see it as being one of their ‘BIG’ releases. Perhaps not globally, but Americans surely gobbled it up. It was a popular album in the U.K. (#2) and Miss You charted in the same position, but there’s definitely not the same kind of nostalgia for it across the pond amongst that age-group who’d have purchased it in 1978.

Well and look at 1965, Satisfaction/Out of OUr Heads. I realize that song wasn't on the UK version of the album, but it's stunning that after that "pinnacle of 45 success", OOOH didn't outsell the debut album. That had to be a higher peak for them than the debut album, as you even said in 1965 for 5 minutes they were more popular now that Jesus er, the Beatles.

I'd like to see the actual sales numbers now in the UK and see just how close the album sales were against one another.

Re: Rolling Stones No 2
Posted by: Big Al ()
Date: October 20, 2022 10:52

Quote
treaclefingers


Well and look at 1965, Satisfaction/Out of OUr Heads. I realize that song wasn't on the UK version of the album, but it's stunning that after that "pinnacle of 45 success", OOOH didn't outsell the debut album. That had to be a higher peak for them than the debut album, as you even said in 1965 for 5 minutes they were more popular now that Jesus er, the Beatles.

I'd like to see the actual sales numbers now in the UK and see just how close the album sales were against one another.

Yes, I've long wanted to know their true U.K. sale-figures. I've often been under the impression that their popularity at home dipped around 1967. Between the Buttons and Satanic Majesty's didn't fare as well as their predecessors; same goes for the contemporary singles of the day: We Love You/Dandelion. Even the popular 'Rolling Stones Monthly Book' folded in 1967. Consider that the Beatles Book continued a good while. I do suspect that their shift from R&B and early forays into rock, to a more poppy and, later, psychedelic sound, could've hindered their popularity in the U.K. Anyway, they certainly bounced back in '68, with Jumpin' Jack Flash.

Re: Rolling Stones No 2
Date: October 20, 2022 10:52

I can't find certified units sold for their debut album, but somewhere in the back of my head I have the number 300.000 - is that correct?

Goats Head Soup sold 100.000, and was among the best-selling albums in the UK round the "golden era", methinks.

Very interesting indeed, that their two first album sold so well in the UK!

Blue And Lonesome was more of a marketing trick, wasn't it – when they pushed out those cheap "deluxe-releases" for practically nothing round Christmas? smiling smiley



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-10-20 10:53 by DandelionPowderman.

Re: Rolling Stones No 2
Posted by: Big Al ()
Date: October 20, 2022 11:01

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I can't find certified units sold for their debut album, but somewhere in the back of my head I have the number 300.000 - is that correct?

Goats Head Soup sold 100.000, and was among the best-selling albums in the UK round the "golden era", methinks.

Very interesting indeed, that their two first album sold so well in the UK!

Blue And Lonesome was more of a marketing trick, wasn't it – when they pushed out those cheap "deluxe-releases" for practically nothing round Christmas? smiling smiley

300,000 seems low for an album that spent 12 weeks at #1, but it could be correct. LP's were not the huge-seller in the U.K. at the time: the 45rpm was. Gold Head Soup seems low, too. I know we are a relatively small island, but Queens Greatest Hits has shifted over 6 million copies!

Re: Rolling Stones No 2
Date: October 20, 2022 11:05

Quote
Big Al
Quote
DandelionPowderman
I can't find certified units sold for their debut album, but somewhere in the back of my head I have the number 300.000 - is that correct?

Goats Head Soup sold 100.000, and was among the best-selling albums in the UK round the "golden era", methinks.

Very interesting indeed, that their two first album sold so well in the UK!

Blue And Lonesome was more of a marketing trick, wasn't it – when they pushed out those cheap "deluxe-releases" for practically nothing round Christmas? smiling smiley

300,000 seems low for an album that spent 12 weeks at #1, but it could be correct. LP's were not the huge-seller in the U.K. at the time: the 45rpm was. Gold Head Soup seems low, too. I know we are a relatively small island, but Queens Greatest Hits has shifted over 6 million copies!

GHS (100.000) and B&L-numbers (300.000) are from Wikipedia. May be a little off.

Re: Rolling Stones No 2
Posted by: Doxa ()
Date: October 20, 2022 12:08

Here is some corrections to what I said above (memory makes tricks). I will give more detailed account later. Now quickly UK best selling albums (no compilations included), based on 2016 statistics:

1. EXILE 875 000 (clearly their best-selling catalog album)
2. THE ROLLING STONES 860 000
3. STICKY FINGERS 800 000
4. LET IT BLEED 700 000
5. THE ROLLING STONES NO 2 680 000

It needs to point out that the Big Four albums are steady sellers, and especially EXILE's new edition helped a lot of its sales. By contrast, the numbers for their early albums are pretty authentic, based on very much on their heyday. I mean, from where one could even purchase NO 2 these days!

Some others:

SOME GIRLS 425 000

More later!

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-10-20 12:19 by Doxa.

Re: Rolling Stones No 2
Date: October 20, 2022 12:22

Quote
Doxa
Here is some corrections to what I said above (memory makes tricks). I will give more detailed account later. Now quickly UK best selling albums (no compilations included), based on 2016 statistics:

1. EXILE 875 000 (clearly their best-selling catalog album)
2. THE ROLLING STONES 860 000
3. STICKY FINGERS 800 000
4. LET IT BLEED 700 000
5. THE ROLLING STONES NO 2 680 000

It needs to point out that the Big Four albums are steady sellers, and especially EXILE's new edition helped a lot of its sales. By contrast, the numbers for their early albums are pretty authentic, based on very much on their heyday. I mean, from where one could even purchase NO 2 these days!

Some others:

SOME GIRLS 425 000

More later!

- Doxa

For quite some time they used to count double albums as two units, didn't they? Do you know if they've "cleaned up" the statistics for Exile?

Re: Rolling Stones No 2
Posted by: Big Al ()
Date: October 20, 2022 12:26

Thanks, Doxa.

Actually, 680,000 sales for Rolling Stones No.2 is quite impressive, considering it was out-of-print for so many years and even now, is only, really, widely available as a digital download or via streaming. I wouldn't be surprised if the vast majority of those sales took place in the mid-to-late 60's, too.

Re: Rolling Stones No 2
Posted by: Big Al ()
Date: October 20, 2022 12:28

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Doxa
Here is some corrections to what I said above (memory makes tricks). I will give more detailed account later. Now quickly UK best selling albums (no compilations included), based on 2016 statistics:

1. EXILE 875 000 (clearly their best-selling catalog album)
2. THE ROLLING STONES 860 000
3. STICKY FINGERS 800 000
4. LET IT BLEED 700 000
5. THE ROLLING STONES NO 2 680 000

It needs to point out that the Big Four albums are steady sellers, and especially EXILE's new edition helped a lot of its sales. By contrast, the numbers for their early albums are pretty authentic, based on very much on their heyday. I mean, from where one could even purchase NO 2 these days!

Some others:

SOME GIRLS 425 000

More later!

- Doxa

For quite some time they used to count double albums as two units, didn't they? Do you know if they've "cleaned up" the statistics for Exile?

You'd think so. I'd imagine Exile's sales would be higher if they were still counted separately.

Re: Rolling Stones No 2
Posted by: Doxa ()
Date: October 20, 2022 12:36

Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
Big Al
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
Doxa
Quote
Big Al
Quote
DandelionPowderman
The Rolling Stones beat Some Girls chart-wise?

Not globally, of course. Some Girls is their biggest-seller overall, and it certainly is in the U.S.A. I think, however, that Rolling Stones No.2 could be their biggest-selling in the U.K. it did spend an incredible 10 weeks at #1 in early 1965.

Their debut spend even 12 weeks at #1 in UK . It is also their best selling studio album in their home country (NO 2 being second - they really peaked in popularity there then, so it's downhill ever since.. grinning smiley). SOME GIRLS sold only about half of its sales there, reaching #2 at best. Interestingly, decades later, when the album market was already suffering terribly, BLUE & LONESOME managed to sell almost the same amount of copies as the big album era hit album SOME GIRLS in UK. The British love the Stones playing the blues! Cool!

- Doxa

That is trez interesting. I had no idea albums like LIB, Sticky, Exile, Some Girls, Tattoo You couldn't outsell their debut album in the UK.

It is interesting, considering that the single and EP formats were the most popular amongst the Stones’ European demographic in the 60’s. LP’s were very expensive. I’ve read elsewhere, they in terms of sheer fandom, 1965 was their peak in the U.K. yes, for five-minutes, they really were bigger than the Beatles! Regarding Some Girls: I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: it was a U.S. phenomenon. I was surprised by its unwavering popularity amongst so many of the American posters on these message boards, as I genuinely didn’t see it as being one of their ‘BIG’ releases. Perhaps not globally, but Americans surely gobbled it up. It was a popular album in the U.K. (#2) and Miss You charted in the same position, but there’s definitely not the same kind of nostalgia for it across the pond amongst that age-group who’d have purchased it in 1978.

Well and look at 1965, Satisfaction/Out of OUr Heads. I realize that song wasn't on the UK version of the album, but it's stunning that after that "pinnacle of 45 success", OOOH didn't outsell the debut album. That had to be a higher peak for them than the debut album, as you even said in 1965 for 5 minutes they were more popular now that Jesus er, the Beatles.

I'd like to see the actual sales numbers now in the UK and see just how close the album sales were against one another.

One particular British oddity is that "The Last Time" sold more than "Satisfaction" (both number ones, of course) with which the Stones truely made a breakthrough in USA and in many other places on earth. Also OUT OF OUR HEADS only made #2 and its sales were disappointing compared to two previous albums (nowadays 350 000). In USA its equavalent was their first number one. In UK the peak of popularity had already seen...

- Doxa

Re: Rolling Stones No 2
Posted by: Big Al ()
Date: October 20, 2022 12:41

Quote
Doxa


One particular British oddity is that "The Last Time" sold more than "Satisfaction" (both number ones, of course) with which the Stones truely made a breakthrough in USA and in many other places on earth. Also OUT OF OUR HEADS only made #2 and its sales were disappointing compared to two previous albums (nowadays 350 000). In USA its equavalent was their first number one. In UK the peak of popularity had already seen...

- Doxa

I think I knew this little fact, actually. Hmmm, perhaps the Stones' peak-year in the U.K. was 1964, then; going into early 1965.

Re: Rolling Stones No 2
Posted by: ribbelchips ()
Date: October 20, 2022 12:57

Born in 1979, I started to discover the Stones backcatalogue in the late eighties via the first wave of London CD's. The booklet that came with the CDs contained an overview of all available albums in the series and for many years I thought that their second album was titled '12x5' and 'no2' was a bootleg or a compilation album smiling smiley. I own all of the SACD's and it's a pity they didn't re-release no 2 until the Stones In Mono boxset...

I agree with posters above that Under the Boardwalk and Susie Q are pretty weak versions of both songs. The CCR version of Susie Q is only 3 years younger but sounds SO much better and mature. On the other hand, The Stones also sounded a lot better during Beggar's Banquet of course...

Super coincidentally, I bought a pretty good 1965 mono UK copy of 'no 2' two weeks ago. The first time I actually have this album!

Re: Rolling Stones No 2
Posted by: UrbanSteel ()
Date: October 20, 2022 13:29

Quote
ribbelchips
Born in 1979, I started to discover the Stones backcatalogue in the late eighties via the first wave of London CD's. The booklet that came with the CDs contained an overview of all available albums in the series and for many years I thought that their second album was titled '12x5' and 'no2' was a bootleg or a compilation album smiling smiley. I own all of the SACD's and it's a pity they didn't re-release no 2 until the Stones In Mono boxset...

I agree with posters above that Under the Boardwalk and Susie Q are pretty weak versions of both songs. The CCR version of Susie Q is only 3 years younger but sounds SO much better and mature. On the other hand, The Stones also sounded a lot better during Beggar's Banquet of course...

Super coincidentally, I bought a pretty good 1965 mono UK copy of 'no 2' two weeks ago. The first time I actually have this album!


Japan did have a CD release of The Rolling Stones No. 2 in 1987 etc etc, ask ironbelly for details.








Re: Rolling Stones No 2
Posted by: Irix ()
Date: October 20, 2022 13:40

Quote
UrbanSteel

Japan did have a CD release of The Rolling Stones No. 2 in 1987

No.2 as Mono SHM-CD in 2020 as well - [iorr.org] .

Re: Rolling Stones No 2
Posted by: UrbanSteel ()
Date: October 20, 2022 13:55

Quote
Irix
Quote
UrbanSteel

Japan did have a CD release of The Rolling Stones No. 2 in 1987

No.2 as Mono SHM-CD in 2020 as well - [iorr.org] .

You can find that info here [iorr.org]

Re: Stones in Mono to be Re-Released???
Posted by: ironbelly ()
Date: September 8, 2022 23:39

Re: Rolling Stones No 2
Posted by: Irix ()
Date: October 20, 2022 14:05

Quote
UrbanSteel

You can find that info here [iorr.org]

And also here - [iorr.org] .

Re: Rolling Stones No 2
Posted by: His Majesty ()
Date: October 20, 2022 14:27

Quote
treaclefingers


Great finds! One thing I got from the first link was Ambulance ride, $25.

IN 1964!

Good lord I think you could have bought a small car for that price in 1964,

The ambulance receipt may or may not be legit, but collector Ali Zayeri owns it.

The details in the post re Brian's contributions, or lack of, in November 1964 at RCA and Chess seem to be about right though.

Re: Rolling Stones No 2
Posted by: His Majesty ()
Date: October 20, 2022 14:28

Fascinating stats re their debut LP. A lovely wee album so it is.

Re: Rolling Stones No 2
Posted by: Irix ()
Date: October 20, 2022 15:41

Quote
His Majesty

Fascinating stats re their debut LP.

It's mentioned (TRS vs. TRS No.2) in this post: [iorr.org] .



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2022-10-20 16:00 by Irix.

Re: Rolling Stones No 2
Posted by: Big Al ()
Date: October 20, 2022 15:51

Quote
His Majesty
Fascinating stats re their debut LP. A lovely wee album so it is.

Oh, it's fantastic. I love the cover-shot, too. No words necessary.

Re: Rolling Stones No 2
Posted by: walkingthedog ()
Date: October 20, 2022 20:07

Quote
Big Al
Quote
His Majesty
Fascinating stats re their debut LP. A lovely wee album so it is.

Oh, it's fantastic. I love the cover-shot, too. No words necessary.

Super cool cover. And probably the first LP to not feature the name of the artist on the cover front. This gamble paid off!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2022-10-20 20:09 by walkingthedog.

Re: Rolling Stones No 2
Posted by: georgie48 ()
Date: October 22, 2022 19:29

Quote
ironbelly
Quote
georgie48
As a European, I do have the vinyl (red label) of No 2 and when I was visiting Hong Kong in the mid 80s I purchased the poor quality ABKCO CD version. Luckily ABKCO much later released a SACD version, which sounds great. I frequently enjoy listening to those 1964/1965 albums (incl. Now and 12x5). They were the basis for me to become a timeless Rolling Stones fan. My favorite of No 2 is Down The Road Apiece. A great swinger.

smileys with beer
I am a bit puzzled.
What do you mean by 'poor quality ABKCO CD version'? ABKCO never issued No.2 on CD by ABKCO. It was issued on London in Japan three times, though, P33L-25015 (1987), P25L-25033 (1989) and POCD-1913 (1995). But those were Japanese only products. I would not call it poor.
What do you mean by 'ABKCO much later released a SACD version'? There was no SACD for No.2 as a physical media. Although it was released in mono as Hi-Res download.
[www.hdtracks.com]
Also, for very short period No.2 in mono was available in form of DSD for purchase in the USA. But there was no physical product.

Hi ironbelly,
Thanks for your corrections! It "forced" me to (re)organise my CDs (I occasionally lock them up when on holidays for a longer period of time and don't always do that in a tidy waygrinning smiley). Indeed I do not have N0 2 in SACD nor on 1986 London and confused it with England's Newest Hitmakers and 12x5 and Now! They (the SACDs) are all ABKCO releases.
I bought all SCADs available at once while in Boston in August 2002, 18 in total (opening of the 2002/2003 tour) and 50% cheaper than in Europe.
Way back in the late 80s, I bought (indeed) London and ABKCO (some digital remastered) releases of the Stones' official albums in Hong Kong (In Europe, also in those days, CDs were twice as expensive grinning smiley)
Yes, and Down The Road Apiece in on Now! cool smiley

smileys with beer

I'm a GHOST living in a ghost town

Goto Page: Previous12
Current Page: 2 of 2


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Online Users

Guests: 1987
Record Number of Users: 206 on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests: 9627 on January 2, 2024 23:10

Previous page Next page First page IORR home