Today I played Exile On Main Street and Goats Head Soup back to back. From Exile, which of course is a masterpiece of dimensions, what was the idea of GHS?To me, it seems to be a strange direction to take after Exile (Note: I like GHS). It doesn't really seem natural. I'm sure they felt confident in it, and that it felt natural to them. Both are very good records I think, but there seems to be some kind of missing link between these two records. Just like there is between Dirty Work and Steel Wheels. Those two records just have an obvious natural development. SW was kindda starting over. Relaunching the whole thing after the strange way they developed in the mid-eighties.
It just seems weird with EOMS and GHS because it was a period where they seemed to know exactly how good stuff was made. And there ain't a lot of unnatural development in their catalogue by the way. At least not to me. It was weird with Between The buttons and Their Satanic Majesties too, but that kindda seems to be it (Along with EOMS/GHS and DW/SW). All the others seem to have a coherent thought in the development. What was the development idea behind the albums I named (Especially interesting with EOMS and GHS)???

JumpingKentFlash

i think that the direction of ghs was of relaxtion in a sense. if you consider the whirlwind lifestyle of the stones from 69' to 72', it would seem that they
were trying to unwind from something they had created. maybe they just stepped back and decided to try and take a different approach with their sound...plus it would seem that a drugged lethargy had seeped into the music. dancing, heartbreaker, coming down seem to have a heroin haze about them...sticky and exile have a slight cocaine edge to them...
at the time of ghs's release was exile considered a masterpiece yet?

72 Tour - Drugs - @#$%& Blues - Bianca - Drugs - French Narcs - Reggae - Drugs - Kingston - Angie - Jimmy Miller burnout - Australian Tour - Glam Rock

ROCKMAN

the wrong direction, that pretty much sums it up

Not the wrong direction, melillo, but an inevitable one--they were caught up in the excesses of that time and it shows. 1973 was a seminal year in rock n roll- we had the coming of New York Dolls, the first of the wave of bands that were allegedly "heirs" to the Stones throne. I loved them, but they survived for only two albums. We had Iggy, and the release of "Raw Power". I loved this, too, but the sense of self-destruction was all too apparent. The Stones survived the first punk wave, and were seemingly unaffected by it. The second punk wave, though, in 1977, was a different story. The barbarians were at the gates, as was the plague of disco, and in response, we got "Some Girls."

I don't know, I think there's a pretty straight link-Silver Train, Hide Your Love, Dancing w/Mr. D, all have an Exile vibe. JSS makes a good comparison: Coke vs. Heroin. GHS is a little more laid-back. I think the biggest difference is Exile-more Keith, GHS-more Mick J & T. More melody and experimentation on GHS. It also, I think, had a shorter creation period than Exile. For the record, Keith called GHS "Exile pt. 2".


karl

'Don’t forget, if you’re on your bike, wear white'

Although I love GHS, I do agree that it was very different from EOMS. First of all I consider EOMS the greatest album of all time, so I think anywhere was going to have to be in a different direction that would be considered a step down. Another thing is the atmosphere that Exile was recorded on, the Stones knew they had something special with Exile, and they tried to recreate the atmosphere that they had during Exile at Keith's house, but like most things that are recreated it was not as good as the original. I also agree with the things that have been mentioned already, except I wouldn't say it was a step in the wrong direction, because I love it. It isn't as good as BB LIB SF and EOMS, but there are little albums that can compare with these, I think it was a good album for the follow up to a masterpiece. For some reason I can't help but to compare it to Houses of the Holy following Led Zeppelin IV, it was the same time period, and a great follow up to a classic, that is great in it's own right.

Raise your glass to the good and the evil, Let's drink to the salt of the earth.

Very interesting observation Kent.. With Exile they had nailed the form, and I think GHS was an unique attempt do something different for a change that quite didn't turn out excellent...

There are rockers that really sound like throwaways from Exile ("Silver Train", "Star Star") but for some reason (coke->heroin, the condition of Keith) they just don't sound so fresh and natural but instead repetive and tired. There are cuts that some consider interesting musical experimentation (is "Can You Hear The Music?" a left over from Majesties???), but what I call true album fillers... to this category I would also put the totally forced sounding opening song - the weakest ever. Something is missing also from that hit-potential but out of tune hard- rocker "Heartbreaker". There is something catchy in that loose blues jam "Hide Your Love", but I still consider it a filler.

But then there are some superb songs and performances: "100 years Ago", "Winter", "Angie".. the songs that really make this album interesting and unique in the Stones catalog. The interplay of Two Micks is beautiful, and "Winter" is the swang song of their love (with "Moonlight Mile"). This album presents some of best Jagger vocal performances ever. Was this melodic Taylor/Jagger team work an intentional choice or an act of necessity that is difficult to say. The melodic tendency of GHS was disappeared by the time of IORR, the album that was supposed to be more "back to Exile", a Keith-rocker album again. (But funny thing, at the GHS time, Keith himself was very melodic and sentimental: "Coming Down Again", the melody of "Angie".)

Maybe the reason for the a bit tiresome feeling of the album and its production has to do with the collapse of Jimmy Miller. And WHO wouldn't be a bit creatively tired after releasing 4 best records ever?

Finally, to make this short, perhaps the direction of the melodic, sophisticated musical landscape of GHS was not the best one, but still there are elements, mainly the co-work of two Micks, that would have been interesting to see where it would lead. Now it sounds that there was a potentiality never truely actualized. Perhaps the album should have had been more radical with its contra-Exile mood to make it ANOTHER masterpiece. It's follower IORR was much weaker attempt and a far cry from their golden period highlights; the first time the Stones tried to sound "like they used to do", creatively taking their first step back ever.

- Doxa

Was a basrard son of Exile SF,
somewhat of a leftover mentality,
but works in it's own right, main
problem is standing in the shadow
of all that greatness.

It may've been critically slammed by the
hardcore fans at the time who felt worried/
let down, but if I remember correctly it sold
quite well, tho no doubt Exile and SF have
more than caught up/ surpassed it since
then, to enjoy a legendary status that
was not so apparant to many casual
fans at the time..................

Great thread - and I agree 100% w/ Rockman, and I too love the album - but to me SF, EOMS, & GHS are sort of the Stones' drugs/redemption/decay trilogy, then IORR was an attempt, contrived, at return to form for critics/kids who were writing the Stones off as too 'old' (over 30) to 'rock' or too 'irrelevant' - hence their least inspired album (but I like it, too)

Fans felt let down because they
perceived asomething new with
GHS + IORR -that there were
clunkers on both lp's, but
I don't think that was
necessarily anything
new, tho it perhaps grew
more pronounced from here on in
as they outlived most of their
contemporaries and yet still
had to grind out new product.
Perhaps there was some advantage
to the Beatles way of quiting
while on top and leaving their
musical cannon and reputation
in pretty near top form?

Yes, Wings sure didnt carry the baggage the Beatles would have had if the latter recorded "My Love" or "Silly Love Songs" or "Woman Is the Nigger of the World"...Dying (Hendrix, etc) helps too, as does having your new work completely ignored (Crosby's CPR, Lou Reed) by a popular audience.

Exile is the best party I ever attended....GHS is the morning after. A natural progression. I love them both!

Ross

ross-is right!! sounds good?

i think ghs could have been a great album...but for drugs... i think angie, star, heartbreaker, 100 years ago and winter are far better than anything done on exile..they still hold up all these years later.. silver train and mr. d could have been great...if jagger would have redone the vocals .

the rest were just fillers... anyway i like ghs a lot too!

Nobody here is mentioning: Fingerprint File - I loved this funky grove tune!!

with Taylor on Bass, Keith handling the rhythm - damn good song!!!

MLC

Yeah but Finger Print is not on Goats Head.

ROCKMAN

JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Today I played Exile On Main Street and Goats Head
> Soup back to back

What a day!

I always felt that GHS was a more laid back album. I never relate to the fact that it came after Exile. It is a sort of a weird album for the Stones in some ways.

I think the band was literally exhausted.
Keith was deeeeeep into the Heroin
Jimmy Miller was so wacked out even KEITH knew he had to go
Mick was married and by all accounts was being constantly annoyed by Bianca
Hanging in Jamaica and smoking GIGANTIC doobies "yeah, it sounds great"
especially with no producer around to tell them that maybe they should try the
song again

Who Knows ? Not a bad album but in hindsight it reminds me of a 70's Emotional Rescue. A couple decent tunes, but overall a lightweight album

Milo, NYC
Down In The Gutter

My head says Exile is the best but my heart's with Goats Head Soup. Doxa makes some very good points as always - the more typical Stones material is the least convincing on Goat's Head Soup e.g. Star Star and Silver Train. I would also agree Hide Your Love isn't a particuarly strong song but it hardly matters. This is an example where the strongest songs are not always the most effective. I think that song has a really great spontaneous feel.
What Exile and Goats Head Soup have in common is they are slightly blurred around the edges - the songs don't sit as well in a conventional sense as Beggars Banquet-Sticky Fingers and Some Girls.That's not meant as a fault though - that's the Stones the way i like them best.

I really like GHS and I like the fact that, with the exception of Silver Train, there really isn't a direct musical connection to EOMS that I can see. It's not like the BB to LIB to SF progression. I see GHS more in line with IORR and Black and Blue. I think people lump it in the EOMS and others is becuase of it's timing and the 73 tour, and the Jimmy Miller credit but musically to me it has more in common with the 2 discs that came after it ( IORR and B&.

To me it has always been a closing of the Jimmy Miller period and an opening of the Glimmer Twins period.

Keith of course is completely straight

I think the link from SF, EOMS, thru GHS is clear - SF they relish in drug references, irony, rock & roll, but there is evidence of the desperation to come (CYHMK's chorus, Got the Blues, Sway)- Exile, it's the Stones & their world, the post 60s exhaustion & (Exiles) unflinching look at the walking wounded & a bleary search for real feeling & love amidst the wreckage & despair, and a knockout punch to the cynicism & disillusionment that had crept into the culture of 72; GHS has a pastoral feel, & a strong sense of junk & loss & ennui & 'where's Keith?' with shards of light & tough-minded lyrics. I see no similarity between GHS & Black & Blue at all - the latter is more of a transitional album whose pleasures are musical, the tracks (with not much to say lyrically or thematically) that lay down new directions to explore musically: hard funk, reggae, Philly soul, & Fats Waller grooves. IORR, despite its merits, still seems like the weakest of all these, the most forced. Yes I recall, btw, the letdown everyone felt re Exile - Lester Bangs captured it in Creem - the murk, screens & scrims, the apparent clutter of horns & lack of standout guitar solos, the desperate lyrics mostly buried- it took a long time to hear it, & in the US Bangs was the first critic to do a complete turnaround, in '73.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-03-19 18:29 by john r.

Yes John, you explain it well with the
Bangs /Creem reference. I remember this
quite well too. Exile was not so highly
exalted upon release as it is today. I was
in Grade 10, and this album was like an
inside thing. It might be underground
and cool to love it but not necessarily
their most popular album in years -far
from it. Not everyone agreed, no way.
Fans, then as now, were even arguing
that the band had had it! Were pissed
off, thought it garbage.

In comparison GHS was an easier and bigger
sell. A big hit ballad helps! And there's
"Star (Ahem) Star" for some balance/ offset,
that could be dangerous but hopefully not
offend. Plus a lot more. Winter? An often
overlooked beauty!

Of course, with time our views change.
Exile it is, most everyone now agrees.
Is pop culture style historical revisionism
I think. Still GHS is quite an enigmatic
album from this perspective. Folks shouldn't
write off GHS, even tho!

Quite frankly I'm glad to play all three back to back
when I'm on a roll. SF Exile GHS -all are essential
early 70's Stones!

BTW Creem ruled eh?

davido, yes creem ruled - btw i checked out their online archive recently & found a very fine article about the death of NY Dolls' Killer Kane - it's an amazing story & portrait, check it out!! "Death of a Doll" its called
GHS is indeed enigmatic - which probably kept me coming back to it over the years!

Hello John -thanks for the Creem tip! Will check it out.
Yes, at the very least GHR should be given another spin
whenever either SF or Exile seems to be dominating
yer player!