Tell Me :
Talk
I think it is more of a case of how those songs compare with many of the songs on the albums that came immediately before. The Stones were incredibly consistent from BEGGARS BANQUET - EXILE ON MAIN STREET.
Good read here, I always did think "Winter" is sort of the "Moonlight Mile" of GHS, same sort of vibe, close to the same place on the album.
Kind of the way, "You gotta move" and IORR's "Short and Curlies" to me are sort of related, not really listenable, kind of silly, short songs, pick one's own adjectives.
"Winter" is kind of metaphysical, spiritual, more like MM. "Wild Horses" might be more like "Angie", I'd have to think about it. In some ways, the country sound of WH is a bit like SV, Sweet Virginia in that they are both sort of country songs.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-01 22:31 by BroomWagon.
Nicely put Edward, lets not forget the drugs too. Both
KR and MT were strung out on heroin during GHS and the ganja in Jamacia is legendary (lambsbread OMG). That probably contributed more to the mellow dreamy feel of GHS and it's long term popularity today. With all the folks smoking weed these days....IORR was more scattered and cocaine influenced, and that being less popular these days (in USA anyway), well you get where I'm going here.
It's a tough pill to swallow but what drugs these guys were indulging in had a tremendous effect on what these guys were putting out at different times in their careers. They were not just taking them occasionally, more like daily meals of the stuff. We and they are paying the price now, with health and mobility issues probably brought on a bit prematurely by the substances. peace.
It's only Rock and Roll is an often played Stones single even if you just want to say as a single compared to Angie and Heartbreaker on GHS, IORR is played way more than those two together.
At that time, there was a big rock and roll revival; Chuck Berry's movie was "Hail, Hail Rock and Roll", Bad Company had a song near that time of course, Rock and Roll fantasy, Bay city rollers, yes, pop, rock and roll love letter, Jethro Tull, Too old to rock and roll, Mott the hoople with the great 'Golden age of Rock and Roll", Lennon's album of '50s rockers was simply called Rock and Roll, believe he even did Angel baby on that album so it was a big deal to incorporate something about that golden age of rock and roll into your music, Lou Reed "rock and roll animal" and so many more examples. It's only rock and roll, but I like it.
.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-01 22:57 by BroomWagon.
I like that analogy. Winter, to me, has a more romantic, less cynical vibe also. Obviously, WH was written during Jagger's breakup with Marianne, so that makes sense. I love the song, don't get me wrong. I remember when this album was new to me, and during a family trip to a small, rural-like town outside Corpus Christi, I fell in love with SF. It's has a warm, rustic feeling.
As to Edward's point about GHS falling short after the Big Four, I think that may also have something to do with perception: There was something BIG, EPIC about the 60s....legendary. So we tend to view the songs in that context. I do the same thing with latter--day Stones. Nothing now will ever match the intensity and urgency of the Stones 68-78, It just won't. SO maybe its our own personal perception of these songs and their times.
Because taken alone, songs like Winter, If You REally Want To Be MY Friend, Memory Motel, Fool To Cry....are fantastic, rich and full of texture musically and narratively. Dylan's Blond and Blond or Highway 61 Revisited are part of that mythical period. Yet, IMO, Isis is just as epic. But because it came after, it will never have the same glow or status. But its still a great song.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-01 23:07 by stupidguy2.
Then again you could also point out songs like Dear Doctor, Country Honk, great in the context of these albums, but mostly filler.
Well, this is the thing. Up to this point each Stones album was a manifesto of the counter-culture at the time, or it was percieved as such anyways. This was still when all that "voice of a generation" jazz was such a big deal. So I can imagine people waiting for the next Sermon From The Mount, getting GHS, and feeling let-down. Free of all that almost 40 years later, we can look back and see some great songs on some uneven albums. The three mid 70's albums leading up to Some Girls are great fodder for fans because it seems everyone has their personal list of so-called "hidden gems". I always thought Winter was Mick trying to do a Van Morrison "Astral Weeks" type thing in the way the jam of CYHMK was a nod to Santana, and Stray Cat Blues a nod to the Velvet Underground. Not as successful, but interesting. IORR has a great one-two-three punch off the top. I'm also a fan of the funky numbers like Fingerprint File, Hot Stuff & Hey Negrita. Lots of stuff on those albums to sprinkle into the playlist for variety from time to time even if they are short on all-time classics.
Good point. Also, younger fans, like me, who discovered the Stones post-Some Girls or because of it, tend to look more fondly, IMO. Simply because we were perhaps not shackled by the counter-culture sermon-on-the-mount expectations. Those albums just sounded so cool to me because, sandwiched between Big Four and Some Girls - and discovered after the fact - they were so different, such a departure and remain singular in their feel.
I notice this most on Fingerprint File. It sounds to me like they sped the tape up to pitch his vocals higher. This technique has been used by many.
Agreed that it sounds like this on Fingerprint, but Luxury and some others sound like that too. Is the whole album a little fast? I think I read on this board once that there was a copy of FF at "corrected" speed, but nothing about the rest of the album.
I personally have never really thought of 'Dear Doctor' and 'Country Honk' as filler. I think the difference between, say, the albums BEGGARS BANQUET, LET IT BLEED, and STICKY FINGERS, when compared with GOATS HEAD SOUP, is that many of the songs from those earlier albums genuinely stand up really well outside the context of those albums. They are very sharp, and very precise, and many of them to a point, fairly radio friendly. They are accessible individually as songs, as well as contributing to the greater whole as album tracks. However, this perhaps is less true of EXILE ON MAIN STREET, who's songs tend to compliment each other best within the specific vibe of the album. That's not to say EXILE ON MAIN STREET is inferior in any way, to those previous albums, because in my opinion it's not, it's more a case of the Stones being prepared to invite you more deeply into their world, outside perhaps the context of them existing as merely commercial pop stars. The Stones are prepared to delve here ever more deeply into exploring their primary influences. There's a rawness and an impenertability about EXILE to begin with, although for me, even on a first listen, i believed i was in the presence of greatness. To a point the same is true of GOATS HEAD SOUP also, because many of the songs don't immediately grab you, and that it is perhaps best to listen to those songs best within the context of the album. GOATS HEAD SOUP is a very different album to EXILE in many ways ultimately, because EXILE was a remarkably focused piece of work, if you really do digest those songs individually, despite early impressions of abandonment, and the splattering of rock 'n' roll noise. GOATS HEAD SOUP is ultimately less focused as a whole, although there are a number of songs that can exist outside the context of the album quite freely, the obvious one being 'Angie', and also 'Star Star', despite the censorship. However, the key i have always believed to GOATS HEAD SOUP, is the ability of the listener to capture that vibe. Ultimately, this album has the potential to deliver truly intoxicating results within the melancholy, and somewhat meandering framework of many of its songs, because it is predominantly more of a mood album (and sometimes rather heavy at that), than a collection of accessible pop/rock 'n' roll songs. Yes, it is to a point indulgent, and a little unfocused at times too, and maybe possesses a druggy decadence as well, but given a few spins it can become deeply addictive, too. 'Star Star' is a really laugh, being placed at the very end of the album, because its the least typical track on the album, despite perhaps being the most typical stones song outside the context of this album, also. The song is almost like a wake up call to the listener after the very heavy vibe of a few of those previous songs. It's like the Stones are saying come on its time to have fun, lyrics, riff and all. GOATS HEAD SOUP is actually, ultimately, one of my very favourite Stones albums, and possibly my most played too, but it works in a very different context to the big four in my opinion.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-02 11:20 by Edward Twining.
the discussion is excellent and interresting but sometimes you just gotta FEEL it.
personally i love those 3 albums ghs iorr b&b in all their glory ,and different "sounds"
ghs great drum sound , whole record wonderfully muddy ( or better, moody)
iorr a lot clearer and different with MTs strat in most songs (why the strat?)
B&B the crispiest of them all
but the best thing is they all have great great songs .
Yes, all three albums do have some virtues, without doubt. In fact i don't really ever think of GOATS HEAD SOUP and BLACK AND BLUE as being mediocre/poor, and had it not been for following on from the big four, their reputation would be that much higher. Often, though, it is all about perceptions, and the time and place being right, and the Stones did achieve a rather magnificent run of brilliant albums and singles leading up to the early seventies, and they also did represent the youth of their day, as well, in terms the culture of the sixties. However, nothing lasts forever, and especially when the Stones have a younger generation growing up around them. Personally, i think GOATS HEAD SOUP, IT'S ONLY ROCK 'N' ROLL, and BLACK AND BLUE lack a degree of conviction, as though the Stones were no longer as assured in terms of how best to tap into their muse. Funk elements begin creeping a little into their music around this time too, with varying degrees of success. One gets the feeling the Stones were willing to dabble a little in funk, and also ballad, as well as their more typical rock genre, but there was less of a feeling of being truly inspired, generally, with perhaps a few interesting exceptions. Sometimes i get the feeling the arrangements of these songs were arrived at via the mixing desk, instead of having a clear vision as to where these songs should be going. Actually, for me, their more typical rock 'n' roll sound was when they sounded at their least inspired at this point, and especially on IT'S ONLY ROCK 'N' ROLL, where the Stones-by numbers appoach first truly came into play. The more funky elements were a little more successful, and songs like 'Hot Stuff' and 'Hey Negrita' did have a great groove, despite not being the most memorable of songs. The ballads, however, was where the Stones truly shone on these albums - 'Angie', 'Winter', 'Time Waits For No-One', 'Fool To Cry' and 'Memory Motel', to a degree shows the Stones truly maturing within an area they had barely touched on at such a scale, and these songs are genuinely successful, and show the Stones approaching a new level of tenderness and maturity that one could argue they never quite manage to repeat, once they felt a little more re-energised by punk on the SOME GIRLS album, and thereafter. One truly gets the feeling listening to these albums, that Jagger was well and truly in control, like never before, and for whatever may be their shortcomings, Jagger did actually manage to hold things together and keep things ticking over, and the Stones did maintain a large degree of success commercially. There are some great songs to be found from this period, undoubtedly, and the musicianship (and also Jagger's vocals) especially on GOATS HEAD SOUP and BLACK AND BLUE, is at times really rather impressive. However, it perhaps is also true that the Stones were growing very insular within their own little world at this time, within their personal lives, and habits too (celebrity, jet set lifestyles, drugs etc.) and there is also a knock on effect of a decadency and a jaded lethagy seeping into the music, too. Punk pretty much shook them up and gave them a new lease of life with SOME GIRLS where the songs became more immediate and a lot less indulgent, and the Stones did manage to reinvent themselves to a more contemporary audience. With SOME GIRLS the emphasis actually shifted back to being about the songs, and like on BEGGARS BANQUET, LET IT BLEED, AND STICKY FINGERS, the songs very much stood up individually on their own terms, and outside the context of the album. This perhaps kept them ticking over for the next three years, yet from the perspective of thirty years on, and with what the Stones have released post TATTOO YOU, one is tempted to truly re evaluate those mid seventies albums like never before, and have a much greater appreciation of the fact that there are a number of true gems to be found within them, that the Stones would simply die for today. I think i should rephrase that - the Stones, taking the good and not so good from these albums, would actually probably die for them today, anyway, that's if they have anything about them!!
Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-03 08:37 by Edward Twining.
I could never imagine using the word filler to describe these 2 songs.
You know; Edward....if you used the "enter-button", a lot of more people would bother to read your posts. Just a suggestion.
Enter-button used or not, I really suggest people to read them anyway. Take the time and enjoy. Wonderful reading.
But I think it is true that the font and type of this board is not the easiest readable for longer posts. Even though the archaic nature is one of the charms of IORR, like the band's we love...
- Doxa
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
GravityBoy
()
Date: December 1, 2011 11:07
1972-1974 influences?
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
Edward Twining
()
Date: December 1, 2011 21:36
Quote
leteyer
Artistic drought??
Wow, Heartbreaker, Time Waits for no one, If You Really Want to be my Friend,
Star Star, If You Can't Rock Me, IORR, Angie, Dance Little Sister, Coming Down Again, Winter.
Don't know what's not to like in those two albums.
I think it is more of a case of how those songs compare with many of the songs on the albums that came immediately before. The Stones were incredibly consistent from BEGGARS BANQUET - EXILE ON MAIN STREET.
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
BroomWagon
()
Date: December 1, 2011 22:15
Quote
Edward Twining
In a sense i wouldn't disagree with you, stupidguy2. 'Winter' is an epic song, within a ballad form, whereas 'Wild Horses' while also being a ballad, is much more subdued within its character, and is perhaps more typical of a conventional Stones ballad. 'Wild Horses' in some ways should act as a template for Jagger in how best to sing ballads within that certain form, because in the last three decades, Jagger's completely lost the knack. Structurally, i think 'Wild Horses' has all the hallmarks of a classic, it is so tidily written and arranged, and to a point it is easy to see why it is chosen to be covered by other artists fairly frequently too. For me 'Wild Horses', along with 'Moonlight Mile' is a conventionally great Stones ballad. However, 'Winter' for me, seems a lot less meticulously mapped out, which was fairly unusual for the Stones up to this period (well since SATANIC MAJESTIES anyway), and there's a sort of hazy and unfocused feel to it, as with a number of other Stones songs from GOATS HEAD SOUP, as though perhaps the Stones were a little more distracted than usual around this time. As a song in a more conventional sense, as in a commercial sense, i don't think to the wider public it would ever be as easily digestable as, say, 'Wild Horses', or even 'Moonlight Mile', because it isn't so finely tuned. However, if you actually do manage to feel the vibe within this song, in terms of its overall power, i think it is one of the most majestic, and soulful songs the Stones have ever recorded. Yes, in those terms i think it goes beyond 'Wild Horses', and even perhaps 'Moonlight Mile'. However, as with much of GOATS HEAD SOUP, i think you have to be a musical connisseur of a certain order, to fully appreciate it. 'Winter' is much closer stylistically, to 'Moonlight Mile' anyway, and despite 'Moonlight Mile's greater musical focus, as in it being that much more meticulously written and recorded, something extra special does happen with 'Winter'. Whatever the Stones managed to throw into the pot, as within the mixing of this song, seems to work so magnificently - Jagger's vocal, Taylor's guitar, the strings and all. Sometimes i really do feel with the Stones on this track they managed to get lucky, because i'm not so sure it was totally pre-conceived, yet if luck is all it is, they managed to find it on many of the other less focused tracks on GOATS HEAD SOUP too. Maybe that really was part of the master plan (but i somehow doubt it!). Ultimately, the Stones muse at this point hadn't really deserted them even though they were no longer operating 100%.
Good read here, I always did think "Winter" is sort of the "Moonlight Mile" of GHS, same sort of vibe, close to the same place on the album.
Kind of the way, "You gotta move" and IORR's "Short and Curlies" to me are sort of related, not really listenable, kind of silly, short songs, pick one's own adjectives.
"Winter" is kind of metaphysical, spiritual, more like MM. "Wild Horses" might be more like "Angie", I'd have to think about it. In some ways, the country sound of WH is a bit like SV, Sweet Virginia in that they are both sort of country songs.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-01 22:31 by BroomWagon.
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: December 1, 2011 22:29
Quote
Edward Twining
GOATS HEAD SOUP i think really grows in stature over repeated listens, and the songs that seem a little uninspiring and perhaps a touch indulgent at first, actually reveal themselves to be quite sensitive and rather beautiful over time. I am thinking here of tracks like 'Winter' and 'Can You Hear The Music?' which can on first few listens sound like the Stones were somewhat lost in a haze. 'Hide Your Love' also seems pretty much like a knockabout jam leftover, and maybe not the Stones most inspiring moment, and i still think it perhaps isn't, yet it has the ability to become greatly infectious too over repeated listens. Generally, with GOATS HEAD SOUP, one gets the feeling the Stones musical focus had begun to slip, yet there are elements to its sound, and especially Mick Taylor's contribution, within the mellow nature of the music, that transforms GOATS HEAD SOUP into a rather unique Stones offering.
IT'S ONLY ROCK 'N' ROLL i believe hasn't got that extra element, which is so significant on GOATS HEAD SOUP. It shares much of GOATS HEAD SOUP's lack of focus, but this time to a far greater degree, and there isn't that more interesting mellow musical texture at hand either (with perhaps one exception), which was so appealing on GOATS HEAD SOUP, of which to act as a distraction. IT'S ONLY ROCK 'N' ROLL is pretty much the Stones-by-numbers, where everything appears to be in place on the surface, but really it's just the Stones going through the motions and banging out another riff, without much degree of incentive. Some fans may actually prefer it to GOATS HEAD SOUP because it may perhaps be more typical of the Stones in terms of direction, and musical energy etc, yet i tend to think of IT'S ONLY ROCK AND ROLL as ultimately one of their very weakest efforts leading up to the post TATTOO YOU era.
However, what the Stones were going through with GOATS HEAD SOUP and IT'S ONLY ROCK 'N' ROLL is also very indicative of the time period too, and especially with regard to what was happening to several other 60s musical veterans - the Kinks and John Lennon included. The tightly focused work from the 70/71 period seemed very much by 73/74 to be getting caught up in excessive, and indugent decadence, and the musical spark that ignited much of the sixties music seemed very much to be dying.
Nicely put Edward, lets not forget the drugs too. Both
KR and MT were strung out on heroin during GHS and the ganja in Jamacia is legendary (lambsbread OMG). That probably contributed more to the mellow dreamy feel of GHS and it's long term popularity today. With all the folks smoking weed these days....IORR was more scattered and cocaine influenced, and that being less popular these days (in USA anyway), well you get where I'm going here.
It's a tough pill to swallow but what drugs these guys were indulging in had a tremendous effect on what these guys were putting out at different times in their careers. They were not just taking them occasionally, more like daily meals of the stuff. We and they are paying the price now, with health and mobility issues probably brought on a bit prematurely by the substances. peace.
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
BroomWagon
()
Date: December 1, 2011 22:55
Quote
Edward Twining
However, what the Stones were going through with GOATS HEAD SOUP and IT'S ONLY ROCK 'N' ROLL is also very indicative of the time period too, and especially with regard to what was happening to several other 60s musical veterans - the Kinks and John Lennon included. The tightly focused work from the 70/71 period seemed very much by 73/74 to be getting caught up in excessive, and indugent decadence, and the musical spark that ignited much of the sixties music seemed very much to be dying.
It's only Rock and Roll is an often played Stones single even if you just want to say as a single compared to Angie and Heartbreaker on GHS, IORR is played way more than those two together.
At that time, there was a big rock and roll revival; Chuck Berry's movie was "Hail, Hail Rock and Roll", Bad Company had a song near that time of course, Rock and Roll fantasy, Bay city rollers, yes, pop, rock and roll love letter, Jethro Tull, Too old to rock and roll, Mott the hoople with the great 'Golden age of Rock and Roll", Lennon's album of '50s rockers was simply called Rock and Roll, believe he even did Angel baby on that album so it was a big deal to incorporate something about that golden age of rock and roll into your music, Lou Reed "rock and roll animal" and so many more examples. It's only rock and roll, but I like it.
.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-01 22:57 by BroomWagon.
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
stupidguy2
()
Date: December 1, 2011 23:04
Quote
BroomWagonQuote
Edward Twining
In a sense i wouldn't disagree with you, stupidguy2. 'Winter' is an epic song, within a ballad form, whereas 'Wild Horses' while also being a ballad, is much more subdued within its character, and is perhaps more typical of a conventional Stones ballad. 'Wild Horses' in some ways should act as a template for Jagger in how best to sing ballads within that certain form, because in the last three decades, Jagger's completely lost the knack. Structurally, i think 'Wild Horses' has all the hallmarks of a classic, it is so tidily written and arranged, and to a point it is easy to see why it is chosen to be covered by other artists fairly frequently too. For me 'Wild Horses', along with 'Moonlight Mile' is a conventionally great Stones ballad. However, 'Winter' for me, seems a lot less meticulously mapped out, which was fairly unusual for the Stones up to this period (well since SATANIC MAJESTIES anyway), and there's a sort of hazy and unfocused feel to it, as with a number of other Stones songs from GOATS HEAD SOUP, as though perhaps the Stones were a little more distracted than usual around this time. As a song in a more conventional sense, as in a commercial sense, i don't think to the wider public it would ever be as easily digestable as, say, 'Wild Horses', or even 'Moonlight Mile', because it isn't so finely tuned. However, if you actually do manage to feel the vibe within this song, in terms of its overall power, i think it is one of the most majestic, and soulful songs the Stones have ever recorded. Yes, in those terms i think it goes beyond 'Wild Horses', and even perhaps 'Moonlight Mile'. However, as with much of GOATS HEAD SOUP, i think you have to be a musical connisseur of a certain order, to fully appreciate it. 'Winter' is much closer stylistically, to 'Moonlight Mile' anyway, and despite 'Moonlight Mile's greater musical focus, as in it being that much more meticulously written and recorded, something extra special does happen with 'Winter'. Whatever the Stones managed to throw into the pot, as within the mixing of this song, seems to work so magnificently - Jagger's vocal, Taylor's guitar, the strings and all. Sometimes i really do feel with the Stones on this track they managed to get lucky, because i'm not so sure it was totally pre-conceived, yet if luck is all it is, they managed to find it on many of the other less focused tracks on GOATS HEAD SOUP too. Maybe that really was part of the master plan (but i somehow doubt it!). Ultimately, the Stones muse at this point hadn't really deserted them even though they were no longer operating 100%.
Good read here, I always did think "Winter" is sort of the "Moonlight Mile" of GHS, same sort of vibe, close to the same place on the album.
Kind of the way, "You gotta move" and IORR's "Short and Curlies" to me are sort of related, not really listenable, kind of silly, short songs, pick one's own adjectives.
"Winter" is kind of metaphysical, spiritual, more like MM. "Wild Horses" might be more like "Angie", I'd have to think about it. In some ways, the country sound of WH is a bit like SV, Sweet Virginia in that they are both sort of country songs.
I like that analogy. Winter, to me, has a more romantic, less cynical vibe also. Obviously, WH was written during Jagger's breakup with Marianne, so that makes sense. I love the song, don't get me wrong. I remember when this album was new to me, and during a family trip to a small, rural-like town outside Corpus Christi, I fell in love with SF. It's has a warm, rustic feeling.
As to Edward's point about GHS falling short after the Big Four, I think that may also have something to do with perception: There was something BIG, EPIC about the 60s....legendary. So we tend to view the songs in that context. I do the same thing with latter--day Stones. Nothing now will ever match the intensity and urgency of the Stones 68-78, It just won't. SO maybe its our own personal perception of these songs and their times.
Because taken alone, songs like Winter, If You REally Want To Be MY Friend, Memory Motel, Fool To Cry....are fantastic, rich and full of texture musically and narratively. Dylan's Blond and Blond or Highway 61 Revisited are part of that mythical period. Yet, IMO, Isis is just as epic. But because it came after, it will never have the same glow or status. But its still a great song.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-01 23:07 by stupidguy2.
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
stupidguy2
()
Date: December 1, 2011 23:11
Quote
Edward TwiningQuote
leteyer
Artistic drought??
Wow, Heartbreaker, Time Waits for no one, If You Really Want to be my Friend,
Star Star, If You Can't Rock Me, IORR, Angie, Dance Little Sister, Coming Down Again, Winter.
Don't know what's not to like in those two albums.
I think it is more of a case of how those songs compare with many of the songs on the albums that came immediately before. The Stones were incredibly consistent from BEGGARS BANQUET - EXILE ON MAIN STREET.
Then again you could also point out songs like Dear Doctor, Country Honk, great in the context of these albums, but mostly filler.
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
andrewt
()
Date: December 1, 2011 23:13
Quote
Edward TwiningQuote
leteyer
Artistic drought??
Wow, Heartbreaker, Time Waits for no one, If You Really Want to be my Friend,
Star Star, If You Can't Rock Me, IORR, Angie, Dance Little Sister, Coming Down Again, Winter.
Don't know what's not to like in those two albums.
I think it is more of a case of how those songs compare with many of the songs on the albums that came immediately before. The Stones were incredibly consistent from BEGGARS BANQUET - EXILE ON MAIN STREET.
Well, this is the thing. Up to this point each Stones album was a manifesto of the counter-culture at the time, or it was percieved as such anyways. This was still when all that "voice of a generation" jazz was such a big deal. So I can imagine people waiting for the next Sermon From The Mount, getting GHS, and feeling let-down. Free of all that almost 40 years later, we can look back and see some great songs on some uneven albums. The three mid 70's albums leading up to Some Girls are great fodder for fans because it seems everyone has their personal list of so-called "hidden gems". I always thought Winter was Mick trying to do a Van Morrison "Astral Weeks" type thing in the way the jam of CYHMK was a nod to Santana, and Stray Cat Blues a nod to the Velvet Underground. Not as successful, but interesting. IORR has a great one-two-three punch off the top. I'm also a fan of the funky numbers like Fingerprint File, Hot Stuff & Hey Negrita. Lots of stuff on those albums to sprinkle into the playlist for variety from time to time even if they are short on all-time classics.
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
stupidguy2
()
Date: December 2, 2011 00:08
Quote
andrewtQuote
Edward TwiningQuote
leteyer
Artistic drought??
Wow, Heartbreaker, Time Waits for no one, If You Really Want to be my Friend,
Star Star, If You Can't Rock Me, IORR, Angie, Dance Little Sister, Coming Down Again, Winter.
Don't know what's not to like in those two albums.
I think it is more of a case of how those songs compare with many of the songs on the albums that came immediately before. The Stones were incredibly consistent from BEGGARS BANQUET - EXILE ON MAIN STREET.
Well, this is the thing. Up to this point each Stones album was a manifesto of the counter-culture at the time, or it was percieved as such anyways. This was still when all that "voice of a generation" jazz was such a big deal. So I can imagine people waiting for the next Sermon From The Mount, getting GHS, and feeling let-down. Free of all that almost 40 years later, we can look back and see some great songs on some uneven albums. The three mid 70's albums leading up to Some Girls are great fodder for fans because it seems everyone has their personal list of so-called "hidden gems". I always thought Winter was Mick trying to do a Van Morrison "Astral Weeks" type thing in the way the jam of CYHMK was a nod to Santana, and Stray Cat Blues a nod to the Velvet Underground. Not as successful, but interesting. IORR has a great one-two-three punch off the top. I'm also a fan of the funky numbers like Fingerprint File, Hot Stuff & Hey Negrita. Lots of stuff on those albums to sprinkle into the playlist for variety from time to time even if they are short on all-time classics.
Good point. Also, younger fans, like me, who discovered the Stones post-Some Girls or because of it, tend to look more fondly, IMO. Simply because we were perhaps not shackled by the counter-culture sermon-on-the-mount expectations. Those albums just sounded so cool to me because, sandwiched between Big Four and Some Girls - and discovered after the fact - they were so different, such a departure and remain singular in their feel.
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
GOO
()
Date: December 2, 2011 00:15
best songs
ghs-----winter
iorr----time waits for noone
ghs-----winter
iorr----time waits for noone
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
stupidguy2
()
Date: December 2, 2011 00:19
Don't know if this means anything to anybody, but GHS is Ryan Adams' favorite Stones album. Winter was his then-girlfriend's favorite song of all time.
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
TeaAtThree
()
Date: December 2, 2011 02:17
Question about IORR:
Mick J's voice seemed so much higher and thinner to me when I listened to it last night. Why is that? Is it just the song selection? The keys the tunes are in?
Mick J's voice seemed so much higher and thinner to me when I listened to it last night. Why is that? Is it just the song selection? The keys the tunes are in?
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
melillo
()
Date: December 2, 2011 02:27
both are good strong albums IMO with the impossible task of going up against exile, although GHS would have achieved even better status if WOF and TOPS were finished and included
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
deuce
()
Date: December 2, 2011 02:55
Quote
TeaAtThree
Question about IORR:
Mick J's voice seemed so much higher and thinner to me when I listened to it last night. Why is that? Is it just the song selection? The keys the tunes are in?
I notice this most on Fingerprint File. It sounds to me like they sped the tape up to pitch his vocals higher. This technique has been used by many.
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
TeaAtThree
()
Date: December 2, 2011 03:43
Quote
deuceQuote
TeaAtThree
Question about IORR:
Mick J's voice seemed so much higher and thinner to me when I listened to it last night. Why is that? Is it just the song selection? The keys the tunes are in?
I notice this most on Fingerprint File. It sounds to me like they sped the tape up to pitch his vocals higher. This technique has been used by many.
Agreed that it sounds like this on Fingerprint, but Luxury and some others sound like that too. Is the whole album a little fast? I think I read on this board once that there was a copy of FF at "corrected" speed, but nothing about the rest of the album.
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
BroomWagon
()
Date: December 2, 2011 07:24
I still think the mid-'70s, when American Graffiti came out, all that, was about people getting back to rock and roll, not just rock. There is that Beatles album with the silver cover. I'm convinced things were taking off. USA did not get over the day the music died very well really and there is some truth in that song.
1974 saw: Life is a rock.
Around that time, Argent did this one:
Everyone was singing about it, a few years after this, Cheap Trick did Fats Domino's 'Ain't that a shame', Black Sabbath did "we sold our souls for r n r", naturally LZ's "rock n roll from the Zoso album too.:
Happy Days came out opening up with "Rock around the clock".
It's only rock and roll is one of the more likely songs you will hear on the radio by the Rolling Stones.
Things petering out? More like they were gearing up. "Getting back" to the basics.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-02 07:27 by BroomWagon.
1974 saw: Life is a rock.
Quote
FM, AM, hits are clickin' while the clock is tock-a-tickin'
Friends and Romans, salutations, Brenda and the Tabulations
Carly Simon, I behold her, Rolling Stones and centerfoldin'
Johnny Cash and Johnny Rivers, can't stop now, I got the shivers
Mungo Jerry, Peter Peter Paul and Paul and Mary Mary
Dr. John the nightly tripper, Doris Day and Jack the Ripper
Gotta go Sir, gotta swelter, Leon Russell, Gimme Shelter
Miracles in smokey places, slide guitars and Fender basses
Mushroom omelet, Bonnie Bramlett, Wilson Pickett, stop and kick it
Life is a rock but the radio
Life is a rock but the radio
[lyricsplayground.com]
Around that time, Argent did this one:
Quote
God gave rock and roll to you
gave rock and roll to you
put it in the soul of everyone,
god gave rock and roll to you
gave rock and roll to you
saved rock and roll for everyone
[www.nomorelyrics.net]
Quote
*At the good ole rock and roll road
show, I gotta go
Saturday Night,
Saturday Night
Gonna rock it up, roll it up
Do it all, have a ball,
Saturday Night,
Saturday Night
[www.lyricsdepot.com]
Everyone was singing about it, a few years after this, Cheap Trick did Fats Domino's 'Ain't that a shame', Black Sabbath did "we sold our souls for r n r", naturally LZ's "rock n roll from the Zoso album too.:
Happy Days came out opening up with "Rock around the clock".
It's only rock and roll is one of the more likely songs you will hear on the radio by the Rolling Stones.
Things petering out? More like they were gearing up. "Getting back" to the basics.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-02 07:27 by BroomWagon.
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
BroomWagon
()
Date: December 2, 2011 07:38
So really, it is commendable that the Rolling Stones were trying to make new kinds of music, they took chances and experimented with the 3 albums after Exile.
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
Edward Twining
()
Date: December 2, 2011 09:42
Quote
stupidguy2Quote
Edward TwiningQuote
leteyer
Artistic drought??
Wow, Heartbreaker, Time Waits for no one, If You Really Want to be my Friend,
Star Star, If You Can't Rock Me, IORR, Angie, Dance Little Sister, Coming Down Again, Winter.
Don't know what's not to like in those two albums.
I think it is more of a case of how those songs compare with many of the songs on the albums that came immediately before. The Stones were incredibly consistent from BEGGARS BANQUET - EXILE ON MAIN STREET.
Then again you could also point out songs like Dear Doctor, Country Honk, great in the context of these albums, but mostly filler.
I personally have never really thought of 'Dear Doctor' and 'Country Honk' as filler. I think the difference between, say, the albums BEGGARS BANQUET, LET IT BLEED, and STICKY FINGERS, when compared with GOATS HEAD SOUP, is that many of the songs from those earlier albums genuinely stand up really well outside the context of those albums. They are very sharp, and very precise, and many of them to a point, fairly radio friendly. They are accessible individually as songs, as well as contributing to the greater whole as album tracks. However, this perhaps is less true of EXILE ON MAIN STREET, who's songs tend to compliment each other best within the specific vibe of the album. That's not to say EXILE ON MAIN STREET is inferior in any way, to those previous albums, because in my opinion it's not, it's more a case of the Stones being prepared to invite you more deeply into their world, outside perhaps the context of them existing as merely commercial pop stars. The Stones are prepared to delve here ever more deeply into exploring their primary influences. There's a rawness and an impenertability about EXILE to begin with, although for me, even on a first listen, i believed i was in the presence of greatness. To a point the same is true of GOATS HEAD SOUP also, because many of the songs don't immediately grab you, and that it is perhaps best to listen to those songs best within the context of the album. GOATS HEAD SOUP is a very different album to EXILE in many ways ultimately, because EXILE was a remarkably focused piece of work, if you really do digest those songs individually, despite early impressions of abandonment, and the splattering of rock 'n' roll noise. GOATS HEAD SOUP is ultimately less focused as a whole, although there are a number of songs that can exist outside the context of the album quite freely, the obvious one being 'Angie', and also 'Star Star', despite the censorship. However, the key i have always believed to GOATS HEAD SOUP, is the ability of the listener to capture that vibe. Ultimately, this album has the potential to deliver truly intoxicating results within the melancholy, and somewhat meandering framework of many of its songs, because it is predominantly more of a mood album (and sometimes rather heavy at that), than a collection of accessible pop/rock 'n' roll songs. Yes, it is to a point indulgent, and a little unfocused at times too, and maybe possesses a druggy decadence as well, but given a few spins it can become deeply addictive, too. 'Star Star' is a really laugh, being placed at the very end of the album, because its the least typical track on the album, despite perhaps being the most typical stones song outside the context of this album, also. The song is almost like a wake up call to the listener after the very heavy vibe of a few of those previous songs. It's like the Stones are saying come on its time to have fun, lyrics, riff and all. GOATS HEAD SOUP is actually, ultimately, one of my very favourite Stones albums, and possibly my most played too, but it works in a very different context to the big four in my opinion.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-02 11:20 by Edward Twining.
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
russr
()
Date: December 2, 2011 15:33
Goats Head Soup suffered coming on the heels of Exile...and being pretty that record's opposite.
Personally, I think it's one of their best song-wise. In fact pound for pound, I'd argue it's better than Some Girls. Angie...Hide Your Love...Heartbreaker...100 years Ago...Winter...Star Star.... These are hard to top.
Personally, I think it's one of their best song-wise. In fact pound for pound, I'd argue it's better than Some Girls. Angie...Hide Your Love...Heartbreaker...100 years Ago...Winter...Star Star.... These are hard to top.
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
andrewt
()
Date: December 2, 2011 17:48
Quote
stupidguy2Quote
andrewtQuote
Edward TwiningQuote
leteyer
Good point. Also, younger fans, like me, who discovered the Stones post-Some Girls or because of it, tend to look more fondly, IMO. Simply because we were perhaps not shackled by the counter-culture sermon-on-the-mount expectations. Those albums just sounded so cool to me because, sandwiched between Big Four and Some Girls - and discovered after the fact - they were so different, such a departure and remain singular in their feel.
Yep I can relate. Emotional Rescue was the first one I bought on the day it was released.
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
straycatblues73
()
Date: December 2, 2011 17:58
Quote
russr
Goats Head Soup suffered coming on the heels of Exile...and being pretty that record's opposite.
Personally, I think it's one of their best song-wise. In fact pound for pound, I'd argue it's better than Some Girls. Angie...Hide Your Love...Heartbreaker...100 years Ago...Winter...Star Star.... These are hard to top.
the discussion is excellent and interresting but sometimes you just gotta FEEL it.
personally i love those 3 albums ghs iorr b&b in all their glory ,and different "sounds"
ghs great drum sound , whole record wonderfully muddy ( or better, moody)
iorr a lot clearer and different with MTs strat in most songs (why the strat?)
B&B the crispiest of them all
but the best thing is they all have great great songs .
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
ryanpow
()
Date: December 2, 2011 18:32
That's no excuse. A great album helps to define the times. GHS IORR are still good but they aren't great. The stones had a good run. No one stays at the top forever.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-02 18:34 by ryanpow.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-02 18:34 by ryanpow.
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
Edward Twining
()
Date: December 3, 2011 04:36
Quote
straycatblues73
the discussion is excellent and interresting but sometimes you just gotta FEEL it.
personally i love those 3 albums ghs iorr b&b in all their glory ,and different "sounds"
ghs great drum sound , whole record wonderfully muddy ( or better, moody)
iorr a lot clearer and different with MTs strat in most songs (why the strat?)
B&B the crispiest of them all
but the best thing is they all have great great songs .
Yes, all three albums do have some virtues, without doubt. In fact i don't really ever think of GOATS HEAD SOUP and BLACK AND BLUE as being mediocre/poor, and had it not been for following on from the big four, their reputation would be that much higher. Often, though, it is all about perceptions, and the time and place being right, and the Stones did achieve a rather magnificent run of brilliant albums and singles leading up to the early seventies, and they also did represent the youth of their day, as well, in terms the culture of the sixties. However, nothing lasts forever, and especially when the Stones have a younger generation growing up around them. Personally, i think GOATS HEAD SOUP, IT'S ONLY ROCK 'N' ROLL, and BLACK AND BLUE lack a degree of conviction, as though the Stones were no longer as assured in terms of how best to tap into their muse. Funk elements begin creeping a little into their music around this time too, with varying degrees of success. One gets the feeling the Stones were willing to dabble a little in funk, and also ballad, as well as their more typical rock genre, but there was less of a feeling of being truly inspired, generally, with perhaps a few interesting exceptions. Sometimes i get the feeling the arrangements of these songs were arrived at via the mixing desk, instead of having a clear vision as to where these songs should be going. Actually, for me, their more typical rock 'n' roll sound was when they sounded at their least inspired at this point, and especially on IT'S ONLY ROCK 'N' ROLL, where the Stones-by numbers appoach first truly came into play. The more funky elements were a little more successful, and songs like 'Hot Stuff' and 'Hey Negrita' did have a great groove, despite not being the most memorable of songs. The ballads, however, was where the Stones truly shone on these albums - 'Angie', 'Winter', 'Time Waits For No-One', 'Fool To Cry' and 'Memory Motel', to a degree shows the Stones truly maturing within an area they had barely touched on at such a scale, and these songs are genuinely successful, and show the Stones approaching a new level of tenderness and maturity that one could argue they never quite manage to repeat, once they felt a little more re-energised by punk on the SOME GIRLS album, and thereafter. One truly gets the feeling listening to these albums, that Jagger was well and truly in control, like never before, and for whatever may be their shortcomings, Jagger did actually manage to hold things together and keep things ticking over, and the Stones did maintain a large degree of success commercially. There are some great songs to be found from this period, undoubtedly, and the musicianship (and also Jagger's vocals) especially on GOATS HEAD SOUP and BLACK AND BLUE, is at times really rather impressive. However, it perhaps is also true that the Stones were growing very insular within their own little world at this time, within their personal lives, and habits too (celebrity, jet set lifestyles, drugs etc.) and there is also a knock on effect of a decadency and a jaded lethagy seeping into the music, too. Punk pretty much shook them up and gave them a new lease of life with SOME GIRLS where the songs became more immediate and a lot less indulgent, and the Stones did manage to reinvent themselves to a more contemporary audience. With SOME GIRLS the emphasis actually shifted back to being about the songs, and like on BEGGARS BANQUET, LET IT BLEED, AND STICKY FINGERS, the songs very much stood up individually on their own terms, and outside the context of the album. This perhaps kept them ticking over for the next three years, yet from the perspective of thirty years on, and with what the Stones have released post TATTOO YOU, one is tempted to truly re evaluate those mid seventies albums like never before, and have a much greater appreciation of the fact that there are a number of true gems to be found within them, that the Stones would simply die for today. I think i should rephrase that - the Stones, taking the good and not so good from these albums, would actually probably die for them today, anyway, that's if they have anything about them!!
Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-03 08:37 by Edward Twining.
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
MKjan
()
Date: December 3, 2011 06:35
Quote
stupidguy2Quote
Edward TwiningQuote
leteyer
Artistic drought??
Wow, Heartbreaker, Time Waits for no one, If You Really Want to be my Friend,
Star Star, If You Can't Rock Me, IORR, Angie, Dance Little Sister, Coming Down Again, Winter.
Don't know what's not to like in those two albums.
I think it is more of a case of how those songs compare with many of the songs on the albums that came immediately before. The Stones were incredibly consistent from BEGGARS BANQUET - EXILE ON MAIN STREET.
Then again you could also point out songs like Dear Doctor, Country Honk, great in the context of these albums, but mostly filler.
I could never imagine using the word filler to describe these 2 songs.
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
Erik_Snow
()
Date: December 3, 2011 17:44
Quote
Edward TwiningQuote
stupidguy2Quote
Edward TwiningQuote
leteyer
Artistic drought??
Wow, Heartbreaker, Time Waits for no one, If You Really Want to be my Friend,
Star Star, If You Can't Rock Me, IORR, Angie, Dance Little Sister, Coming Down Again, Winter.
Don't know what's not to like in those two albums.
I think it is more of a case of how those songs compare with many of the songs on the albums that came immediately before. The Stones were incredibly consistent from BEGGARS BANQUET - EXILE ON MAIN STREET.
Then again you could also point out songs like Dear Doctor, Country Honk, great in the context of these albums, but mostly filler.
I personally have never really thought of 'Dear Doctor' and 'Country Honk' as filler. I think the difference between, say, the albums BEGGARS BANQUET, LET IT BLEED, and STICKY FINGERS, when compared with GOATS HEAD SOUP, is that many of the songs from those earlier albums genuinely stand up really well outside the context of those albums. They are very sharp, and very precise, and many of them to a point, fairly radio friendly. They are accessible individually as songs, as well as contributing to the greater whole as album tracks. However, this perhaps is less true of EXILE ON MAIN STREET, who's songs tend to compliment each other best within the specific vibe of the album. That's not to say EXILE ON MAIN STREET is inferior in any way, to those previous albums, because in my opinion it's not, it's more a case of the Stones being prepared to invite you more deeply into their world, outside perhaps the context of them existing as merely commercial pop stars. The Stones are prepared to delve here ever more deeply into exploring their primary influences. There's a rawness and an impenertability about EXILE to begin with, although for me, even on a first listen, i believed i was in the presence of greatness. To a point the same is true of GOATS HEAD SOUP also, because many of the songs don't immediately grab you, and that it is perhaps best to listen to those songs best within the context of the album. GOATS HEAD SOUP is a very different album to EXILE in many ways ultimately, because EXILE was a remarkably focused piece of work, if you really do digest those songs individually, despite early impressions of abandonment, and the splattering of rock 'n' roll noise. GOATS HEAD SOUP is ultimately less focused as a whole, although there are a number of songs that can exist outside the context of the album quite freely, the obvious one being 'Angie', and also 'Star Star', despite the censorship. However, the key i have always believed to GOATS HEAD SOUP, is the ability of the listener to capture that vibe. Ultimately, this album has the potential to deliver truly intoxicating results within the melancholy, and somewhat meandering framework of many of its songs, because it is predominantly more of a mood album (and sometimes rather heavy at that), than a collection of accessible pop/rock 'n' roll songs. Yes, it is to a point indulgent, and a little unfocused at times too, and maybe possesses a druggy decadence as well, but given a few spins it can become deeply addictive, too. 'Star Star' is a really laugh, being placed at the very end of the album, because its the least typical track on the album, despite perhaps being the most typical stones song outside the context of this album, also. The song is almost like a wake up call to the listener after the very heavy vibe of a few of those previous songs. It's like the Stones are saying come on its time to have fun, lyrics, riff and all. GOATS HEAD SOUP is actually, ultimately, one of my very favourite Stones albums, and possibly my most played too, but it works in a very different context to the big four in my opinion.
You know; Edward....if you used the "enter-button", a lot of more people would bother to read your posts. Just a suggestion.
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
slew
()
Date: December 3, 2011 18:14
I like both GHS and IORR. I have stated this before but the three albums suffer reputation wise coming on the heals of the "big four" but to me they are all very good with one possible great in GHS. I would agree with Edward's assesment above that Exile and GHS are mood albums and not radio friendly.
GHS is strong all the way through. IORR side one had the makings of a great album but side two lags a bit though I like all of the songs with the exception of Luxury and Short and Curlies. Why these albums get poor reviews is beyond me. GHS has had somewhat of a rvival amongst critics but IORR has not.
GHS is strong all the way through. IORR side one had the makings of a great album but side two lags a bit though I like all of the songs with the exception of Luxury and Short and Curlies. Why these albums get poor reviews is beyond me. GHS has had somewhat of a rvival amongst critics but IORR has not.
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: December 3, 2011 18:16
Quote
Erik_SnowQuote
Edward TwiningQuote
stupidguy2Quote
Edward TwiningQuote
leteyer
Artistic drought??
Wow, Heartbreaker, Time Waits for no one, If You Really Want to be my Friend,
Star Star, If You Can't Rock Me, IORR, Angie, Dance Little Sister, Coming Down Again, Winter.
Don't know what's not to like in those two albums.
I think it is more of a case of how those songs compare with many of the songs on the albums that came immediately before. The Stones were incredibly consistent from BEGGARS BANQUET - EXILE ON MAIN STREET.
Then again you could also point out songs like Dear Doctor, Country Honk, great in the context of these albums, but mostly filler.
I personally have never really thought of 'Dear Doctor' and 'Country Honk' as filler. I think the difference between, say, the albums BEGGARS BANQUET, LET IT BLEED, and STICKY FINGERS, when compared with GOATS HEAD SOUP, is that many of the songs from those earlier albums genuinely stand up really well outside the context of those albums. They are very sharp, and very precise, and many of them to a point, fairly radio friendly. They are accessible individually as songs, as well as contributing to the greater whole as album tracks. However, this perhaps is less true of EXILE ON MAIN STREET, who's songs tend to compliment each other best within the specific vibe of the album. That's not to say EXILE ON MAIN STREET is inferior in any way, to those previous albums, because in my opinion it's not, it's more a case of the Stones being prepared to invite you more deeply into their world, outside perhaps the context of them existing as merely commercial pop stars. The Stones are prepared to delve here ever more deeply into exploring their primary influences. There's a rawness and an impenertability about EXILE to begin with, although for me, even on a first listen, i believed i was in the presence of greatness. To a point the same is true of GOATS HEAD SOUP also, because many of the songs don't immediately grab you, and that it is perhaps best to listen to those songs best within the context of the album. GOATS HEAD SOUP is a very different album to EXILE in many ways ultimately, because EXILE was a remarkably focused piece of work, if you really do digest those songs individually, despite early impressions of abandonment, and the splattering of rock 'n' roll noise. GOATS HEAD SOUP is ultimately less focused as a whole, although there are a number of songs that can exist outside the context of the album quite freely, the obvious one being 'Angie', and also 'Star Star', despite the censorship. However, the key i have always believed to GOATS HEAD SOUP, is the ability of the listener to capture that vibe. Ultimately, this album has the potential to deliver truly intoxicating results within the melancholy, and somewhat meandering framework of many of its songs, because it is predominantly more of a mood album (and sometimes rather heavy at that), than a collection of accessible pop/rock 'n' roll songs. Yes, it is to a point indulgent, and a little unfocused at times too, and maybe possesses a druggy decadence as well, but given a few spins it can become deeply addictive, too. 'Star Star' is a really laugh, being placed at the very end of the album, because its the least typical track on the album, despite perhaps being the most typical stones song outside the context of this album, also. The song is almost like a wake up call to the listener after the very heavy vibe of a few of those previous songs. It's like the Stones are saying come on its time to have fun, lyrics, riff and all. GOATS HEAD SOUP is actually, ultimately, one of my very favourite Stones albums, and possibly my most played too, but it works in a very different context to the big four in my opinion.
You know; Edward....if you used the "enter-button", a lot of more people would bother to read your posts. Just a suggestion.
Enter-button used or not, I really suggest people to read them anyway. Take the time and enjoy. Wonderful reading.
But I think it is true that the font and type of this board is not the easiest readable for longer posts. Even though the archaic nature is one of the charms of IORR, like the band's we love...
- Doxa
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
jamesfdouglas
()
Date: December 4, 2011 02:21
Goats Head Soup s one of my favouirite all-time albums. I may get hazed for this but I find I get get lost and escape in it more than Beggar's Banquet. I even indirectly named my band after it. (thought I'd be true to my iorrian 'type' 
)
It's Only Rock and Roll, not so much - even though it has Time Waits For No One, one of the most underrated songs in HISTORY.
[thepowergoats.com]
)It's Only Rock and Roll, not so much - even though it has Time Waits For No One, one of the most underrated songs in HISTORY.
[thepowergoats.com]
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
BroomWagon
()
Date: December 4, 2011 02:57
Edward Twining's observations are very much spot on and essays worthy of reading imho, ex. I have always thought that "Winter" was like the Moonlight Mile of GHS but never stated it in words. For another comparison, Bob Dylan's voice sometimes is called nasal or ridiculed but that hasn't stopped Dylan from penning some of the greatest songs of the last several decades. It's fine however Edward writes. Kind of like the Dylan song, "Absolutely Sweet Marie", even the Flamin' Groovies didn't change one thing.
I like BLACK & BLUE more than the other 2 anyway though I don't care much for Hotstuff but the rest is okay and I think TATTOO YOU is better than all 3, perhaps combined.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-04 04:52 by BroomWagon.
I like BLACK & BLUE more than the other 2 anyway though I don't care much for Hotstuff but the rest is okay and I think TATTOO YOU is better than all 3, perhaps combined.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-04 04:52 by BroomWagon.
Re: GHS/IORR sign of their times, not suckiness
Posted by:
mstmst
()
Date: December 4, 2011 06:05
Ok - my assessment is that exile marked the moment when m&k last worked as a team in writing and developing the songs (as a rule). On ghs, Mick started collaborating with Billy and mt rather than Keith (e.g. Winter, 100 years ago, hide your love, others). That is the most telling difference between these albums and the glory days. There are still interesting songs - but a departure from the quintessential stones of the glory days. Going forward, m&k would no longer live and work together but rather meet and put together projects when necessary (the main exception being sg in 77-78). I like the ghs and iorr songs, but mostly they were not m&k collaborations in the same sense that the earlier albums were - and did not have the stonesy vibe that I love to this day.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
adamw3405 , bobo , ChrisMahavishnu , DandelionPowderman , Domonkos , EJM , frankotero , goingmad , KeithNacho , martinw , Rocknroll1969 , rubyeveryday , Slop , switchblade1975 , Torsten
Guests:
1296
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10