Like most on this board, I love them both. JJ Flash on Brussells doesn't seem to have the punch that Ya Yas has. Star Star on Brussells is stunning. They were a very different sounding band in 73 than just two short years later on the 75 Tour of the Americas. How good was it to hear Keith praising Jagger, Taylor, and Wyman? Very encouraged.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
straycatuk
I would like to hear a complete 69 show with no overdubs.Now that would be something.

sc uk

Most of the songs that were overdubbed are available on the internet without Mick's overdubs. Not that big of a difference, imo. Never understood why he felt he needed to do the overdubs in the first place.

There are no guitar overdubs, apart from Keith's extra rhythm guitar on Little Queenie.

So essentially, there are no overdubs on Ya Yas.

How does 'essentially, there are no overdubs on Ya Yas' work with the fact that there are, in fact, vocal and guitar overdubs on Ya-Ya's? Did you mean barely any overdubs? Because a lot of those vocals are overdubs.

Quote
yorkey
Ya-Ya's. Brussel Affairs is amazing, brilliant, but it can get a bit repetitive, fast paced open g riffing for an hour, whereas Ladies and Gents and Ya-Ya's are more, I dunno... Varied, perhaps.

you say that like its a bad thing.

I think Brussels is better than L&G. A lot better actually.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
yorkey
Ya-Ya's. Brussel Affairs is amazing, brilliant, but it can get a bit repetitive, fast paced open g riffing for an hour, whereas Ladies and Gents and Ya-Ya's are more, I dunno... Varied, perhaps.

you say that like its a bad thing.

I have to take my open-g riffing in doses, otherwise I might just collapse under effects of the sonic waves.

You got the Sun, You got the Moon,
and you've got
The Rolling Stones

Quote
Doxa
Honestly, I can't really say - since they are so different concepts (in many ways), they are difficult to compare. But what is wonderful is that finally we can actually with a justification compare a 'new' official live product to classical GET YER YA-YA'S OUT! That's an achievement an sich.


- Doxa

Aber aber, we don't have to compare them actually, do we? It's basically the same staff: Mick & Mick, Keith, Charlie and Bill doing a great job on both records: heavy rock sound, sensitive and soulful at the same time. Passionate playing. The difference in concept is not always important. C'est le ton qui fait la musique, not to rationalize it. Their equal good to me. Perfectly simple.

Quote
Amsterdamned

Quote
Doxa
Honestly, I can't really say - since they are so different concepts (in many ways), they are difficult to compare. But what is wonderful is that finally we can actually with a justification compare a 'new' official live product to classical GET YER YA-YA'S OUT! That's an achievement an sich.


- Doxa

Aber aber, we don't have to compare them actually, do we? It's basically the same staff: Mick & Mick, Keith, Charlie and Bill doing a great job on both records: heavy rock sound, sensitive and soulful at the same time. Passionate playing. The difference in concept is not always important. C'est le ton qui fait la musique, not to rationalize it. Their equal good to me. Perfectly simple.

Agree 100%

C

Brussels is better than L&G by far, imo.

Another comment after listening: Taylor has often been criticized here for overplaying. I see it differently. The whole band is up a level in intensity, Bill, Keith, everyone. Taylor's playing within this context fits perfectly.

How many bands wish they could put out a live release that's as good as at least one of these?

This band has now produced two of the best rock concert recordings of all time.

Quote
71Tele
Brussels is better than L&G by far, imo.

Another comment after listening: Taylor has often been criticized here for overplaying. I see it differently. The whole band is up a level in intensity, Bill, Keith, everyone. Taylor's playing within this context fits perfectly.

IMO Taylor never overplayed with the Stones. Call him Mickey the fiddler, I loved it.

Quote
71Tele
Brussels is better than L&G by far, imo.

Another comment after listening: Taylor has often been criticized here for overplaying. I see it differently. The whole band is up a level in intensity, Bill, Keith, everyone. Taylor's playing within this context fits perfectly.

Mick Taylor's rhythm guitar playing is overlooked by some at times too... Solid rhythm on the rockers (Star Star, etc.). MT sometimes adds these interesting chord figures on top of Keith's famous future warhorse riffs (Tumbin' Dice verse and Honky Tonk intro & verse). Plus great weaving (Dancing Mr.D, MR).

Sometimes MT plays a litle too loud when he turns up for lead, but it's mostly fantastic nevertheless...



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-18 19:18 by schillid.

If I had to pick, I'd take Ya-Ya's for the the set list. Anything with Dancing with Mr. D makes it less than perfect for me.

I just love the fact that there is finally something officially released that can complement Ya-Ya's. Had this been rolled out as a CD release with all the bells and whistles, no doubt it would get more attention by more people and would start the conversation about how this could even top Ya-Ya's all together. Hopefully, even with this just being a download, blogs and critics can still find it and spread the word on how amazing this recording is.

I wouldn't say one was better than the other as each has their merits. By the 1973 the interplay between Keith and Mick T had changed dramatically from the dynamic they had in 1969 where there was more rhythmic interplay between the two. By 1973 (and arguably 1972) their roles had diverged to the point where they sounded like a different, yet the same, band you take my meaning. Ya Yas has been my favorite LP, Stones or otherwise, for many years. Brussels has been my favorite Stones boot. Great and different performances and on both!

I don't know about better, they both have their strengths.

Ya-Ya's has that version of "Sympathy For The Devil" that still blows my mind to this day and that classic version of "Midnight Rambler" that is more widely known to the general public than the studio version.

Brussels, I like the song selection better. You have Exile and Goats Head Soup tracks, that crazy awesome version of "Gimme Shelter".

Luckily we can have both, as I would have a hard time choosing. If we were just talking the standard version of Ya-Ya's I might give the edge to Brussels, but the second disc that comes with the 40th Anniversary Box levels the playing field. I love every track on Brussels though, but on Ya-Ya's there are quite a few I skip over, I'm not a fan of every track. There is no filler on Brussels.

Difficult to say really,had Ya Yas for ever in my collection, Brussels (Bedspring Symphony ) on vinyl almost as long,plus both many times on CD.
This new release is absolutely superb,can;t stop playing it,whether it's better than than Ya Yas ,who am I to make such a judgement.
So happy to have the ability to listen to both in such quality.
I wasn't in The States during that tour,but was lucky enough to be at Wembley for 73 tour so this is a very nice piece of nostalgia for me as well.
Still in touch with the girl I went to Wembley with,I'm going to send her a copy of this as a memento.

Brussels is easier better! Only original songs, Ya-Yas got 2 CB rockers, should've only been Jagger/Richard tunes on it. But I'm glad Chuck got some extra money this way.

I KNOW for every ten times I have listened to Brussels, I have listened one time to ya-Ya's.

While both are great, I give the edge to Brussels. Ya Ya's was clicking but Taylor had not come into his comfort zone in the band like he had in 73, so for this I love Brussel's better. Plus the Exile and GHS songs.

Versions of Tumbling Dice and Gimme Shelter are among their finest live work ever, imo. Also, this makes me wonder what the other GHS songs would have sounded like live during this period, as these are far superior to the studio album.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-18 22:33 by 71Tele.

Quote
schillid

Quote
71Tele
Brussels is better than L&G by far, imo.

Another comment after listening: Taylor has often been criticized here for overplaying. I see it differently. The whole band is up a level in intensity, Bill, Keith, everyone. Taylor's playing within this context fits perfectly.

Mick Taylor's rhythm guitar playing is overlooked by some at times too... Solid rhythm on the rockers (Star Star, etc.). MT sometimes adds these interesting chord figures on top of Keith's famous future warhorse riffs (Tumbin' Dice verse and Honky Tonk intro & verse). Plus great weaving (Dancing Mr.D, MR).

Sometimes MT plays a litle too loud when he turns up for lead, but it's mostly fantastic nevertheless...

Great point about Taylor's rhythm playing. He almost always found something interesting to do. Really miss that.

Hard to say which one is better. Micks vocals are better on Ya's Ya's for sure. Ya's Ya's is darker , Brussels its more exciting and the band with Taylor is more matured....

Highlights

Ya's Ya's: Sympathy For The Devil, Love in Vain, Midnight Rambler.

Brussels: You Can't Always Get What You Want, Tumblin' Dice, Gimme Shelter.

I'd say Brussels by a nose... No overdubs. It's sound live and Bill Wyman is at his best.

Who cares!!!!!!!

In my opinion Ya ya's set the standard of all live albums and I don't think even the Stones can surpass it. I think that it could matched but not surpassed.
Just listen to the sound that Keith has on his ampeg amplifier thoughout the '69 tour, its so intense. Keith's sound on JJF nad SFM is like a sonic boom hitting you right in the face and going straight through to your spine.

Over dubbs and all I'll take Ya ya's over anything the Stones ever did. Now only if they would of released the 1st Brussels show then I may consider it but to me I am hearing an inferior show as compared to the Brussels boots. The recording of course by today's technology is better than any live Stones show that I have ever heard so that in itself DOES make it a better recording than Ya Yas.

both are great!

GET YER YA YAS OUT! shows the Stones a lot more formal within their playing than on BRUSSELS AFFAIR, which seems much looser, and more wildly excessively rock 'n' roll. In some ways the group seem a little stiffer on GET YER YA YAS OUT!, in terms of them appearing a little more disciplined, and Jagger's singing seems more precise, too. Maybe the overdubs make a difference, perhaps, yet i believe, ultimately, the Stones in 69 were relatively a new live band, working in a very different live context to how they had done in the past, with the arrival of Mick Taylor. GET YER YA YAS OUT! isn't exactly tentative by any stretch of the imagination, because the Stones rock rather magnificently, yet by the time of the 72/73 tours, the Stones find an even more raw and vital way of playing, and much looser too, which i think can only really develop over continued playing, where the group members gain an ever greater understanding between themselves. BRUSSELS AFFAIR, perhaps has the edge for me, although i do have a sneeking preference for those early 73 Australian bootleg shows, than either GET YER YA YAS OUT!, or BRUSSELS AFFAIR. BRUSSELS AFFAIR does show that tinge of excess, that air of decadence, which would later mar the 75/76 shows, but thankfully, it's kept just at the right side of appearing complimentary to the overall performance on this occasion. Jagger, on this tour, sounded more excessive, and sexually charged than ever within his vocal, and physical prowess, and the glam rock era factor served to heighten ever more the ambiguous nature of his performance. By contrast, the Stones in 69, were still pretty much seem as the leaders of their generation, in terms of their social relevance to the younger generation. By 73, they had become more insular, and bordering on pure pantomine.

Better.....

It's like comparing two fine wines or whiskies. Lagavulin or Highland Park? Depends how I'm feeling.

Different, but both are great.

Get Yer Ya Yas Out is one of my favorite albums. I got Get Yer Ya Ya's Out when I was twelve. Midnight Rambler and Sympathy for the Devil are great cuts. Mick Taylor and Keith guitar playing on those songs worked magic.

Brussels Affair may become one of my favorite Stones live sets. It seems to me that by this time there was a clearer dividing line between the lead and rhythm guitar. For me it has a harder sound to it. For that brief moment in time the Stones were on the top of their game.

I've read some people saying that Mick Taylor is overplaying. That was what that era was about. I think that virtually any concert I saw in the 73-80 time frame the lead player was front and center. It was a time of indulgence. For a kid learning to play guitar it was great.

This needs to be released on CD!!!

Quote
71Tele
This needs to be released on CD!!!

i released it onto cd just yesterday and the day before, too. what's the prob?

Quote
Edward Twining
GET YER YA YAS OUT! shows the Stones a lot more formal within their playing than on BRUSSELS AFFAIR, which seems much looser, and more wildly excessively rock 'n' roll. In some ways the group seem a little stiffer on GET YER YA YAS OUT!, in terms of them appearing a little more disciplined, and Jagger's singing seems more precise, too. Maybe the overdubs make a difference, perhaps, yet i believe, ultimately, the Stones in 69 were relatively a new live band, working in a very different live context to how they had done in the past, with the arrival of Mick Taylor. GET YER YA YAS OUT! isn't exactly tentative by any stretch of the imagination, because the Stones rock rather magnificently, yet by the time of the 72/73 tours, the Stones find an even more raw and vital way of playing, and much looser too, which i think can only really develop over continued playing, where the group members gain an ever greater understanding between themselves. BRUSSELS AFFAIR, perhaps has the edge for me, although i do have a sneeking preference for those early 73 Australian bootleg shows, than either GET YER YA YAS OUT!, or BRUSSELS AFFAIR. BRUSSELS AFFAIR does show that tinge of excess, that air of decadence, which would later mar the 75/76 shows, but thankfully, it's kept just at the right side of appearing complimentary to the overall performance on this occasion. Jagger, on this tour, sounded more excessive, and sexually charged than ever within his vocal, and physical prowess, and the glam rock era factor served to heighten ever more the ambiguous nature of his performance. By contrast, the Stones in 69, were still pretty much seem as the leaders of their generation, in terms of their social relevance to the younger generation. By 73, they had become more insular, and bordering on pure pantomine.

It requires the same discipline and looseness to create GET YER YA YAS OUT! and BRUSSELS AFFAIR. These (musical) terms are closer than kissing cousins in the Taylor era to me. The difference between both releases (and all their tours in between the way you describe it) prove the musical originality and abilities the Stones contained to develope in a three-dimensional way. Stating that by '73, they had become more insular, and bordering on pure pantomine may be right from a social or cultural point of view.
When it comes to pure musical intuition and empathy this is just a shallow mask though: Both key frames created an unique tween: teamwork, competence and passion, that made GET YER YA YAS OUT! and BRUSSELS AFFAIR sound
like one and the same company: the Rolling Stones. Live at their very best.