By all means, Gentlemen, carry on! Sorry if disturbed your interaction. The thread title doesn't matter anyway after five pages...

<the people who appeciate either "the old Jones-based band" or "the new 'greatest rock and roll band of the world'", but not both, tend to like those albums.>

They probably have the best songs. I think that's the main reason.

Paradoxically, Taylor's favourite Stones album is BB

Quote
Redhotcarpet
Parachute Woman is my answer. Dark, uplifting, blues yet rock n roll. Hard but swinging. Forward moving but reminiscent of the old times. Sexy shuffle, compressed sound though light and echoing. The original soul of the band intact, Brian' soul really, although it's (mainly) Mick and Keith who does "his" parts on harmonica and slide. Taylor and Ronnie couldve played on it later on and it would still be true to the original soul of the band. The original band (with the feel of Brians genius on their early blues numbers, but also the maturing Keith, the rock n roll of the band)


What do you think, pretty good choice huh?

There is no slide on Parachute Woman.

No slide, but a powerful guitar indeed

Quote
Witness

Quote
Stoneage
Gentlemen, you have changed the subject. Read the thread title again. This is not another Brian Jones thread...

Someone must have led us astray! Who might it be?

The pied piper of IORR?







Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-08-23 16:10 by His Majesty.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
No slide, but a powerful guitar indeed

Indeed, it's cool as @#$%&!

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
Redhotcarpet
Parachute Woman is my answer. Dark, uplifting, blues yet rock n roll. Hard but swinging. Forward moving but reminiscent of the old times. Sexy shuffle, compressed sound though light and echoing. The original soul of the band intact, Brian' soul really, although it's (mainly) Mick and Keith who does "his" parts on harmonica and slide. Taylor and Ronnie couldve played on it later on and it would still be true to the original soul of the band. The original band (with the feel of Brians genius on their early blues numbers, but also the maturing Keith, the rock n roll of the band)


What do you think, pretty good choice huh?

There is no slide on Parachute Woman.

yeah i know, dont know where i got that from, Jig saw maybe, still the bluesy notes, the solo licks. Rock and blues really..



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-08-23 18:07 by Redhotcarpet.

With a touch of lsd.

Quote
Redhotcarpet

Jagger looks *almost* somewhat fat in that youtube-capture. (I have to be careful with commenting on that, in case he reads this message board)
Which reminds me of something I have been thinking about.....I think Jagger would be a much better performer from 1989 onwards, if he had a bigger stomach and more punch overall

Punch or paunch?

Quote
Stoneage
Gentlemen, you have changed the subject. Read the thread title again. This is not another Brian Jones thread...

I think it's now "One member that clearly shows what the stones were all about".

Quote
stonehearted

Quote
Stoneage
Gentlemen, you have changed the subject. Read the thread title again. This is not another Brian Jones thread...

I think it's now "One member that clearly shows what the stones were all about".

There's way too much Brian Jones talk for that to be the case.............

Meow

Me thinks Rocks Off!!!

Quote
Doxa

But there is the second coming of the Stones, a process which took some time, including´changes in altogether musical landscape

- Doxa

With some time to reflect which I had not yesterday, my reaction, Doxa, to your presented idea of two comings of the Rolling Stones (so far) remains the same, not expressed by me then. I think I disagree on a couple of points, stimulating as the idea is all the same. Besides, the noun coming to me tends to be mesmerizing, and I am somewhat blinded by it.

First, central as the Beatles / Stones rivalry was as context, it was not all-encompassing. The Stones had wider antennas and responded to other and different impulses over time. That has some implication to periodization. One suggestion or two only: The alleged inspiration from the Byrds "C.T.A. 102" to "2000 Light Years From Home" during the Brian Jones period and one time Byrds, later Flying Burrito Brothers Gram Parsons with some kind of influence on "Wild Horses" in the midst of Mick Taylor's period. The impulses taken together more pointing at a core of the Stones as continual, despite their changing styles and the substitution of one founding member. Secondly and even more important, the division of the phases of the Rolling Stones are not so sharply divided and clean cut as you happen to (???) present here, even if you state that it took time, in your developed idea of two different comings, and associated with different contexts, in some contrast, I wonder, to what you otherwise have presented. In order to do it in not too many words now, I will point most of all to the periodization in the sentences in bold in the following, (simply not knowing if I agree as to all other aspects)

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I can understand both sides here. The Stones lost a unique trademark sound when Brian left.

A new sound was born in 1968, not 1969, prior to Taylor's arrival. When Taylor arrived, he helped to enhance that sound, a sound that had become very popular in the UK and the US (the mix between rock'n'roll, r&b, soul, blues and country - heavily relying on guitar solos, rather than just the songs themselves).

As I was born into the second era, that was the era that instantly grabbed med when I learned to appreciate the Stones. Funnily, it was TY first - with both Taylor and Wood.

However, quickly I sensed that there was something special with the band's original sound - and that goes for both the R&B/Rock'n'roll period and the pop-rock/more studio-oriented period.

Something of the latter got lost along the way, although some of the best songs, like Moonlight Mile, offer a "professional-sounding" version of that genius music, imo.

Because that means that the development of the Stones did not follow separate different comings. In fact, you did not say so, but I guess that there is some compelling sense in the word "coming" that deeply coluurs the meaning and gets in command. On the other hand, possibly one might say that the images of the Rolling Stones, abstracted from the continual passing of time and in a contrast to their musical development, fits in with this idea of two comings. More than anything that the development in the fan base to a larger extent did.
(If one tentatively adopts the idea, is there a third coming, or is there only a post-classical development and then a prolonged survival, the latter not completely without fruits and moments of magic?)

Latest edit: printing errors.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2013-08-25 02:03 by Witness.

So many unnecessary words for something so simple.

Witness: The music changed. Twice.

Quote
His Majesty
So many unnecessary words for something so simple.

Very well, it may be corrrect. You express my stance then in fewer words in a way that takes care of my intentions, not your own.

You noticed, I hope, that I pointed at some link for a continuity as to how making of two important Stones songs seems to have received impulses from musicians at one time in the Byrds. Those two songs span the gap which for you divide STICKY FINGERS from the preceding albums. Were those words unnecessary?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-08-24 17:15 by Witness.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Witness: The music changed. Twice.

I myself am hesitating in adopting the word "coming". The question is how Doxa (and those who will take his position), he (and they) interpretes Ronny Wood substituting Mick Taylor. Will he (or they) employ that almost religious noun. Or will they use another term for that change. It depends on what transformation they allude to thereby. That was the basis for my question.

To me the Brian Jones period in itself in some respects involves comprising changes in sound and in music over time. However, then there is a question what is involved in what you yourself, Dandelion, refer to as 'change' in Music.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-08-24 17:04 by Witness.

Quote
Witness

Quote
His Majesty
So many unnecessary words for something so simple.

Very well, it may be corrrect. You express my stance then in fewer words in a way that takes care of my intentions, not your own.

You noticed, I hope, that I pointed at some link for a continuity as to how making of two important Stones songs seems to have received impulses from musicians at one time in the Byrds. Those two songs span the gap which for you divide STICKY FINGERS from the preceding albums. Were those words unnecessary?

I meant from all of us.

Quote
Stoneage
The "objective" answer to this can't be anything else but Satisfaction. Ask a thousand randomly selected persons and Satisfaction would be the most common answer.
In many cases because that is the only Stones song "tourists" can name...

I'd say no and go with Brown Sugar if it really comes down to one song. Way closer to what the Stones were - and to more so of an extent than Satisfaction - and still are.

i go for Satisfaction, that is the ultimate Stones song in my mind. And for some reason I also mention Gimme Shelter, there is something very very very special about that song..